Cluck-cluck-cluck-cluck.....Rod Blagojevich is Chickenman.
HANKSTER
· 3 years ago
We should have a parliamentary form of government anyway so more people and parties can be represented.
VanillaMan
· 3 years ago
Obviously the last thing Blagojevich wants is another person making him look stupid.
Yellow Dog Democrat
· 3 years ago
I think that when polls show that 17% of voters are planning on voting for a "third party" candidate, we should stop calling them "third party candidates".
blue dog democrat
· 3 years ago
When voters turn to a third party candidate it shows that they are disgruntled with what the two major parties are offering. The party that can seaze upon this disatisfaction and reposition themselves in a constructive manner will be successful. If the two majors continue to operate in the staus quo then they will reap what they have sown .
ZC
· 3 years ago
Say what you will about him, but Rod-as-campaigner is no fool. This is a no-brainer for his campaign. It's unfair, and by getting onto the ballot - no small feat - Rich Whitney has earned his seat. But I really doubt it will happen.
Though based on the latest news out of Pennsylvania, where the Green Party candidate for Senate appears to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party, I assume someone is checking Rich's financial campaign reports to see how many Republicans are backing him?
zatoichi
· 3 years ago
What happened to Mr. Testicular Veracity? Is Whitney that much of a threat? Sad.
HANKSTER
· 3 years ago
What is funny is that if this were a conservative third party candidate running Topinka would not want him/her in the debates and all of you attacking Blagojevich would be defending Topinka.
Chicken a la Rod
· 3 years ago
If the gov turns tail and runs instead of debating ALL candidates on the ballot, there will be major political blowback. He will be hounded and embarassed...as he should be.
I'll have the Chicken a la Rod, please.
Thinking Green
· 3 years ago
Blagojevich said. “I think it’s important for the major parties to focus on the issues, because the two major parties are the ones that are in a position to make the decisions for the people of Illinois.â€Â
What an arrogant ass.
HANKSTER
· 3 years ago
Chicken a la Rod - I must disagree with you. Every election other parties outside of the major two try to get in the debates, they almost always get rejected and they always say there will be major anger and it never resonates into anything.
Im not saying this is a good or bad thing but thats just how it happens.
Chicken a la Rod
· 3 years ago
Hankster - Really? When's the last time a gubernatorial candidate who was on the ballot was barred from debating in this state?
Make that two orders of the Chicken a la Rod.
'The Gay Governor'
· 3 years ago
Even Andy Martin got included in GOP primary debates.
Carl Nyberg
· 3 years ago
I'd like to see Rich Whitney included in the debates, but he should also be included in the media coverage of the race.
The poll numbers clearly show Illinois voters want another option to G-Rod and JBT. So they probably want to know about the other candidate on the ballot.
Is it too much to ask for the media types to call Whitney's campaign for comments for the articles on the governor's race?
fightforjustice
· 3 years ago
Ross Perot made it into debates in '92. Rod made a political calculation, and that's a higher priority to any commitment to letting voters hear all candidates on the ballot.
Lovie's Leather
· 3 years ago
Ross Perot didn't make it to the debates in '96. I don't see any reason for a candidate that has no chance of winning getting invited to the debates. He hasn't officially made it on the ballot yet. Let's wait and see... most likely, this argument is pointless...
Southern Illinois Democrat
· 3 years ago
Rod wisely does not want Whitney in the debates because then he will have 2 people attacking him in the debates rather than one. But, in my mind, if Whitney has followed the rules and makes the ballot, then he should be in the debates IF he meets a certain level of support. I think when Perot ran in the past, he was allowed to debate because his support in the polls was greater than 5 or7 percent. Maybe thats what should be done in this case. I agree with Lovie's Leather that a candidate with no chance should not be allowed in. But, 5% makes it easier to get on the ballot next time and even if you cant win that makes a big difference to someone in 4 years. And in fairness, I must admit that lean toward voting for Rod again and know if Whitney is on the ballot it affects his ability to win. But, if the rules were followed and the criteria met then he should be on the ballot.
Jennifer Rose/W4G Campaign Man
· 3 years ago
I can assure ZC 10:34 and other readers that the Illinois Green Party and the Whitney Campaign is a force of progressive politics. Read our treasury report, we do not accept corporate contributions and we are not backed by Republican financiers. We are relying on grassroots principles and volunteers (not legal counsels!) who are worth millions.
Whitney is a legitimate and credible candidate who deserves to be included in the debates and he has earned the opportunity to campaign on merit, rather than being bogged down with Democratic obstructionist strategizing.
Whitney's participation in the debates will elevate the discussion and cause both of the so-called-established parties' candidates to stop bickering between themselves and say something RELEVANT to Illinois voters. Whitney is not fringe! He is articulate and well researched. The Democrates and Rebublicans have good reason to think Whitney would make them look bad.
Please support Whitney's efforts by contacting upcoming debate sponsors and insisting that ALL gubernatorial candidates are invited to offer their policies and positions in the public areana. Also, please check out Whitney's website, INCLUDING position statements at whitneyforgov.org
Illinois Green and Growing!
D Wesbter
· 3 years ago
That debate will really be the battle of the liteweights. Not much brains in either candidate
Ashur Odishoo
· 3 years ago
I seem to be in the minority on this one. If you have leverage use it, whether in business or politics. The Green party only hurts Blago, so if he can keep them out, good for him.
I still detest the man's politics.
Ashur Odishoo Candidate State Representative 11th District
Southern Illinois Sunflower
· 3 years ago
>
Ummmm. Isn’t anyone else a little terrified by the implications of that phrase? Seems to me, “professional†corporate politics as usual is at the very root of most of the problems we face right now. In contrast, Mr. Whitney is a breath of fresh air. I, for one, would love to hear him in the debates, and I think he has definately earned the right to be there. But then, I am just a lowly registered voter. (And yes, I print on petitions VERY clearly and have been registered to vote at this address for over ten years--even if the Democrats see fit to challenge that fact as they urge everyone to “play by the rulesâ€Â!)
Roy
· 3 years ago
Lovie...so if the candidate from a major party is trailing in the polls by let's say 20 points, they shouldn't go to the debate? Let them all debate, what is Rod so afraid of?
bored now
· 3 years ago
both the people who passed petitions for the greens in my area were republicans. they didn't try to hide it. jennifer can't be that naive...
Six Degrees of Separation
· 3 years ago
The amusing thing here is the reference to the Republicans as a "major" party in this state. If it wasn't for the US Congressional delegation, the party would be totally irrelevant in IL.
Six Degrees of Separation
· 3 years ago
Ummmm. Isn’t anyone else a little terrified by the implications of that phrase? Seems to me, “professional†corporate politics as usual is at the very root of most of the problems we face right now.
Don't vorry. Ve vill take care of ze little people, too.
Nickname
· 3 years ago
If I was JBT I would not care and go ahead and have the debates with Whitney forget about what Blago does. People who would watch those debates will still watch them and the whole time during the debates Rich Whitney and JBT will bash Blago and his administration. Blago will not be there so he cannot respond and it will probably hurt him even more.
Todd Castro(ger) aka Wumpus
· 3 years ago
Well, why would Rod want to offer the voters another alternative? Why give a "spoiler" some additional press, it is bad enough for him that he is on the ballot, if he still is. He should allow Greenie in if JBT agree's to Stufflebeam in too.
Dorian Breuer
· 3 years ago
bored now, do you have names of the 'republicans' circulating petitions for the greens as you claim? And in what area? You're lodging a serious charge, and if you can't back it up and you're lying, I personally find you a dispicable person. If you have evidence, I'd like to hear it.
Steve
· 3 years ago
I think anyone who qualifies to be on the ballot should be allowed to participate in the debates. I also think that making assumptions about the likelihood that a candidate has a chance to be elected is presumptuous and an attempt to deny others the opportunity to become aware of the candidate's views on the issues.
I think the real agenda behind many of those who want to block Mr. Whitney from participating in the debate is that they know how corrupt and morally bankrupt the republican and democratic parties have become. They are afraid that many citizens are looking for a candidate and a party to vote for that is truly progressive and which has high integrity. They don't want voters to become aware that the Green party is truly progressive, has been against the Iraq war since before it started, is for campaign finance reform (publicly funded elections), instant runoff voting, environmental policies to reduce global climate change, fiscal responsibility, social security, gay marriage, the expansion of civil rights, women's reproductive rights, GLBT rights, making policy decisions based on science - not the bible, individual rights, third political parties, habeas corpus, due process, and against imperialism, torture and secret prisons.
Nowhere in the constitution does it say that there should only be two parties. Voting for the lesser of two evils guarantees a perpetually evil government. Throughout US history third parties have brought us almost all of our major social movements most of us are very proud of – abolition of slavery, women's right to vote, civil rights, 40 hour work week, worker's rights, environmental protections etc., etc. Many of these rights are now under attack and we need the help of third parties in the struggle to retain these hard fought rights.
Dem
· 3 years ago
Nickname is correct. JBT should do a debate with Whitney alone or refuse to debate Rod at all if Whitney isn't included. That would at least make for an interesting game of chicken.
Bubs
· 3 years ago
No doubt he has Brad working on a bill to disenfranchise every person who signed a Whitney petition. After all, if they don't matter, why spend all those tollway savings dollars on counting Green votes? We can instead spend the saved funds on providing health care to every child in Illinois.
grenadia
· 3 years ago
Rich Whitney and the greens collected nearly seven times more signatures than the other candidates who are guaranteed a spot in the debates.
Why not allow him in? He's not as coached and doesn't have the handlers that the dems and repubs do, so he'd be on his own against two entrenched, connected candidates.
Why should Blago fear Whitney? Rod and Judy have been groomed for this opportunity while Rich is a newcomer on the scene and will have to hold his own.
We've got 100 days to go and already 17% say they'd like to vote for someone besides the scandal-ridden D and R.
Voters deserve to hear from a candidate who was able to gain the approval of more than 39,000 Illinoisans to appear on the ballot. Hopefully he can hold his own against Rod and Judy.
Chinaman
· 3 years ago
Ok Steve, we were going along with you until you mentioned that god awful word. PROGRESSIVE Are you guys stuck in the 80's ? That's it your banned no debates for the Greenies. We just can't listen to the self-rightous dribble.
Lee
· 3 years ago
Maybe, Rod, the yellow candidate, is afraid the debate will be held in Springfield and he will be the only candidate who will not know how to get there.
bored now
· 3 years ago
oh, come on, dorian, don't be so naive. i live in the south suburbs in an area that has quite a few republicans (including our "non-partisan" village mayor). no, i don't have their names -- i'm not accustomed to asking people for their names who come up to me on the street. but given the fact this is a gop area, they were quite open as to their purpose.
i'm not sure why this is news to you. the connection between republicans and greens is fairly well-established...
Free Thinker
· 3 years ago
It is interesting that so many posters believe that there can only be 2 parties, 2 points of view, and 2 candidates in a democratic society. It is assumed that voters owe their votes to one of the two, and someone offering another point of view is then "stealing" votes from the annointed parties. Perhaps the readers should back off and look at this rationally, as if they were from a pleuralist society, where the idea that there can be only 2 positions would be snickered at. Of course Whitney should be allowed in the debates. Then we would have a better chance of hearing real ideas, and not sound bitten platitudes.
Honest Abe
· 3 years ago
Please do not forget the partisan make up of the Illinois State Board of Elections. In 1998, the State Board overruled its own hearing officer's findings that the Libertarian Party slate had filed sufficient signatures (in excess of 25,000) to qualify the November ballot. This blatantly political decision resulted in costly litigation for the Illinois taxpayers. Many people believe that Glenn Poshard would have been elected over George Ryan had a third party candidate made the ballot. The Greens better beware. History may repeat no matter how many valid petitions the Greens may have filed.
Anon.
· 3 years ago
Let's face it, it's all part and parcel of the politics as usual stand of keeping 3rd parties off ballots and, failing that, relegated to the position of "loonies" or "long-shots" or "spoilers" who don't "deserve" recognition of their legitmacy as candidates. Neither side wants to legitimize any threat to their two-party monopoly on our government. In this case though, Judy needs another candidate to bash Radimir Achoochevic (gesundheit!) and so she'll make an exception. In general, politicians will do whatever it takes to keep government "theirs", rather than return it to the people.
bored now
· 3 years ago
it's ok, turd. i can lead you to the truth, but i can't make you think. i discovered that a long time ago.
the truth remains that republicans are using the green party for their own purposes (and why shouldn't they?) and this is fairly well-established. whether or not you choose to believe it doesn't make it any less true, it merely demonstrates your capacity for differentiating between truth and what you want to believe!
Chicken a la Rod
· 3 years ago
"bored now" - For crying out loud, take a stand for once. Do you, personally, believe any candidate on the gubernatorial ballot should be allowed to participate in the debates, or not?
Oh, and while you're at it, dish me up a little more of that Chicken a la Rod.
grenadia
· 3 years ago
bored,
I know that you're more than politically savvy, so I don't doubt your info. Folks are just asking for details. For all those dedicated (perhaps naive) greens who were working their behinds off to gather signatures, your statement needs more explanation. The "real" greens were also petitioning in heavily republican (and heavily democratic) areas.
What's your stance on the debates? p.s. Sorry I didn't make it to your social on Saturday night. I've been under the weather this summer.
bored now
· 3 years ago
i won't watch them either way, so why do i care? if judy wants to debate rick whitney, i say go for it! i'm more interested in ydd's comments than who debates who (can a yellow dog democrat vote for a green?)...
Rich Miller
· 3 years ago
To the person who asked why he's being deleted: Dude, this isn't the SJ-R's website. We have a few taste standards. Please choose a more appropriate name.
dinsky-no more
· 3 years ago
lol-- I will choose a different name. I afraid is was the content you were objecting to.
Grenadia makes the point again perhaps more clearly than I. People should be aware that the greens are propped up by any politcal party
bored now
· 3 years ago
grenadia, i know the "greens" in my area (from our common association with lcv, wdf and the sierra club). i don't honestly know if they passed petitions or not. i suspect not, given how many of us were involved in debra shore's campaign, and if we passed petitions for deb, then you were precluded from passing for a third party.
i don't personally care about debates that i don't have candidates in. i don't find them informative, i don't know many voters who watch them, and i don't think we can legitimately call them debates (joint news conferences more like it). so have at it!
i don't personally find the republican's use of greens reprehensible, nor is it a secret. a quick google comes up with plenty of stories where republicans used green efforts and candidates to undermine democrats, and that search can be replicated by anyone interested. of course republicans want to divide progressives, and there's been more than one green party leader willing to allow that to occur. this isn't rocket science.
i've already made it clear, both here and elsewhere, that while i don't care for rod, and i don't see a chance for anyone else to win (without an indictment of the guv by fitzgerald), i also can't count on illinois republicans continuing to be the most disorganized and fractured political "organization" i've come across. illinois is not so blue that progressives can afford to elect republicans because this state (like a lot of states) will be "in play" in 2008 should the democrats foolishly nominate hilliary clinton.
while i've not played on this side of the fence for long, i am still wedded to the conclusion that democrats tend towards the foolish course, whenever possible. the question i have to answer is this: can we afford to elect another republican to the white house? can we afford to perpetuate the bush doctrine of pre-emption? i have to answer 'no' to these questions, and thus, *i* cannot afford to vote for anyone other than a democrat as governor (regardless of how flawed he is) in 2006. the stakes are simply too high. others clearly are making other calculations...
Squideshi
· 3 years ago
The Green Party is secretly controlled by Republicans? What a conspiracy! Break out the tin foil hats--the Illuminati must also be involved.
Is Blagojevich afraid of Rich Whitney, or does he just think that he's too good to debate? If a third-party candidate can make it onto the ballot in Illinois, they have already demonstrated a great deal of support and deserve to debate!
What's wrong Rod? Chickenovich?
Chicken a la Rod
· 3 years ago
"bored now" - Thanks for admitting you don't care about the principle at stake here. It's becoming more clear why you're a Milorad supporter: Neither one of you has any spine.
Or maybe you've just had too much of that tasty Chicken a la Rod.
bored now
· 3 years ago
The Green Party is secretly controlled by Republicans?
i'm not aware that the greens are organized sufficiently to be controlled by anyone. i understand that you're trying to dismiss these comments by making them as absurd as possible, but i'm talking about the greens being *used* by republicans. i don't think any serious person would disagree with that. and why shouldn't republicans try to divide progressives? it's a smart strategy, and it's been successful. i don't assume my opponent is stupid; neither should you...
Squideshi
· 3 years ago
I forgot to mention that we can't afford to waste our votes. Blagojevich may siphon some votes away from Whitney; thus splitting the vote, and acting as the spoiler in this race. Blagojevich has received LOADS of money from wealthy conservatives and multinational corporations. He must be secretly controlled by the Republican Party. Why else would the Democrats change state election law to allow Bush on the ballot, when the Republicans missed the filing deadline here in Illinois?
Phil Huckelberry (ILGP Co-Chai
· 3 years ago
There's an argument being presented here that to qualify for the debates a certain amount of "support" needs to be demonstrated. This is often quantified by polling.
The problem with this is that the polls which are being conducted are refusing to include Rich Whitney in the polls. This isn't a minor point. You can't work your way up the polls if the polls shut you out.
Any poll which excludes Rich Whitney at this point is a biased poll. Period. There is overwhelming evidence at this point that Whitney and the rest of the Green slate will be on the ballot. If you see a poll which isn't including Whitney, complain to the publication that published it, or complain directly to the polling firm.
Go back and re-read Carl Nyberg's comments. It's great that the media isn't totally blacking Whitney out right now, but what we're seeing still isn't good enough. Fair elections require fair media access. And that definitely means being included in the published polls.
Centralia Green
· 3 years ago
Bored Now- I was in Chicago defending Green party petitions and heard some of the crazy attempts to link the Greens with the Republicans there too, like the yarn you're spinning on how they circulated our petitions. Illinois voters see that these "stories" are part of the politics of fear that just don't work anymore. Let's talk issues. When you respond with a sarcastism it will just sound like the death throes of a dying party!!! Let Rich Debate!!
Nathan Helsabeck
· 3 years ago
Whitney should be in the debates. It would make them a lot more listenable that's for sure. These things are mind numbingly bad, becuase the "two parties" spend the entire time trying not to lose votes. Whitney could be outright and honest, becuase he would have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
bored now... how does voting for Rod translate into Hillary 2008 and / or Repbulican victory in 2008. Hillary is a terrible idea for a candidate. Wouldn't a strong showing for the Greens help to wake the Dems up that they can't keep sending up these middle of the road conservatives for presidential races?
Logical one
· 3 years ago
if bored now keeps saying greens are controlled by republicans maybe no one will ever talk about issues or put the other candidates on the spot about things that matter to voters bored now seems VERY SCARED of the greens i wonder why? Who could bored now be, let's say affiliated with?
bored now
· 3 years ago
logic isn't your strong suit, is it?
doubtful
· 3 years ago
Not everyone who claims they are running for the office should be allowed to participate in the debates; it'd be a madhouse akin to the California Davis recall.
There should be set standards, though, and any candidate meeting those standards should be allowed and welcomed to participate. A sitting Governor should not be the person dictating those standards.
Ready for some action
· 3 years ago
Shame on Blago. Shame shame shame. He's obviously threatened by the presence of Whitney and wants to do his best to keep him out of the voter's view.
I say, let Greens debate! It'll surely spice things up a bit and make those debates quite a lot more entertaining. Maybe even get Topinka and Blago to discuss some real issues. That's the whole point right?
Craig
· 3 years ago
I agree with Blago, the greens should get more than one issue, or start calling themselves what they are a special interest group
grenadia
· 3 years ago
Craig, the greens have 10 key values. Look them up at gp.org or ilgp.org and then come back with an informed opinion.
Susan Rodgers
· 3 years ago
The only reason Blagojevich does not want the Greens in the debate is because he is scared.
Craig: What one issue would that be? If you've looked at any of our websites or campaign literature you might notice that from the national party down to our local candidates a range of issues are covered. Energy, education, health, the war, etc. I urge you to go to http://gp.org/platform.shtml or http://whitneyforgov.org/platform.htm and see just how many issues we truly cover. In fact, it's easier to find detailed information on the Green Party's positions then it is for the Republican or Democratic parties.
Bored now: Go check out our filing. If Republicans were truly backing us we'd probably have a lot more money then we actually do. Also, as someone who gathered well over 1000 signatures to see Rich Whitney on the ballot I am completely insulted by the claim that anyone other then a Green supporter helped in gathering signatures. You are either completely dillusional or trying to spin-doctor people into thinking something that is obviously unfounded.
There is something wrong in this state if a candidate can collect over 39,000 signatures in 90 days and still not be allowed fair access to the debates.
Also, it's interesting to note that the most watched debate in the history of televised debates was in 1992 when Perot was allowed to participate. The people want to see more choices.
Garp
· 3 years ago
The conventional thinking is that the Green party on the ballot hurts Blago, however, I really believe that the 17% of people voting for other would swing to Topinka if given the choice between JBT and Blago. If I am correct, then Blago would benefit by keeping the Green party viable.
Real Questions
· 3 years ago
My question for Mr. Whitney is this...can you name your potential agency directors? Who is going to run the State's Medicaid program? Who will the Director of Corrections? What about State Police? Who will be your IDOT Secretary?What is your plan to work with a General Assembly controlled by the Democrats? The Greens talk a lot of theory, but what will they do if they are in charge? Are you going to try to raise taxes?
paddyrollingstone
· 3 years ago
Good for Rod. Nobody cares except the political junkies (like me and everyone else on this blog).
Rich Miller
· 3 years ago
"Real Questions," you should take a look at his website. I've been surprised at some of the real-world issues he's taken on.
SO ILL
· 3 years ago
Real Questions... umm who do you think is running those agencies now? Could it be the non-qualified hacks that were hired because dems and $$$ contributors. give me a break.
Squideshi
· 3 years ago
Voter turnout is at an all-time low; and when people are asked why they don't vote, they say it's because they're not interested and their vote can't make a difference. In other words, these potential voters aren't voting because the establishment party candidates aren't capturing their interest--they choose NEITHER.
The spoiler argument is a lie, and the Democratic leadership knows it. Greens energize NEW voters, who would not otherwise vote and who would certainly not vote for Chicken a la Rod.
It seems to me that the Democratic leadership is doing a lot more harm to the party by using all of these antidemocratic tactics. I don't think that a good number of the activists, ministers, civic leaders, and elected officals will be so quick to support an organization that has accused them of not being registered to vote, living at the wrong address, and forging their own signatures.
The bells are tolling, and the Democratic Machine is pounding the nails into its own coffin here.
bored now
· 3 years ago
susan: i'm sorry the truth is insulting (to you). but i've already responded to this...
It is Easy Being Green
· 3 years ago
The best thing about Rich Whitney is that he is an honest man who does not owe any quid pro quo to big businesses or deep pockets. Of course he can actually represent the interests of Illinois voters far better than the two 'professional' parties! Whitney will base his hiring practices on MERIT. Isn't it time Illinois rid itself of political corruption and look at a candidate who has not been associated with indictments, fraud, etc?
I believe the Illinois Green Party can do a better job managing our state. The Greens have my vote, and I hope they earn yours!
Psyc Kasper
· 3 years ago
Breaking News
This just in...SBoE has Greens at 28,000+ valid signatures, Dem legal counsel (supposedly working PRO BONO! hahahaha) says he cannot possibly rehabilitate 3,000 signatures. Ready to toss in his hat and let the SBoE certify Greens on the state slate.
It is a sad, sad day to be a member of the Democratic leadership. More sad days lie ahead.
BTW...Does ANYONE believe Mike Kasper works for Blagojevich without being paid?
GreenieGirl
· 3 years ago
doubtful, if Illinois was like California, we'd have more choices, as they did in that recall debacle. There were over 100 candidates running. The Greens in IL are the only other party on the ballot, and though we'd welcome easier ballot access, I think this is proof enough that people are taking us seriously. Honestly, I'd like to see Blago and JBT try to get 25,000 signatures - or 39,000 for that matter! I agree that there should be standards, and I encourage those media outlets or whoever is running the debates to publish those standards so that everyone know what they are. If it depends on polls, then I'd like to see polls with Rich Whitney included. People keep talking about the 17% poll, but that did not mention Whitney - it merely said none of the above. And, really, if you think about that, it's pretty sad, for them, that 17% of the people would like ANYONE BUT Rod and JBT!
Gregor
· 3 years ago
The Blagojevich campaign are spineless cowards trying to impede our franchise.
GreenieGirl
· 3 years ago
Psyc Kasper - You're just trying to psych-out the Greens. I'll believe it once I see some proof. But I agree, I don't think Kasper is working pro bono. Total BS!
ANon
· 3 years ago
YEa ten key values... nine of which are democratic ideals
'The Gay Governor'
· 3 years ago
Psyc,
Kasper does not work for Blagojevich. He works for Madigan.
One way or another, he gets paid.
Justice
· 3 years ago
Most of those I know will vote Green, but using "Progressive" sure won't win votes. Get rid of that word fast. It's a loser.
Torpedo
· 3 years ago
Seriously 'Real Questions,' does Blagojevich have all that under control? Is he properly managing the Medicaid program, which ran $3 billion behind (so-called Section 25 liabilities) just last year? When you look around at the government that we have now, do you see a well-oiled machine? No it's a debacle everywhere you look. I'd bet somebody with no experience, but with a commitment to good government (um, lacking these days) and the confidence to hire competent and intelligent people (um, also lacking), could do a better job.
annon. in central illinois
· 3 years ago
What happened to Roddy's "testicular verility"" ??? Hell man you might pick up some pointers !!
Free Thinker
· 3 years ago
bored now seems to feel that Whitney will take votes only from the Democrats. Republicans aren't interested in balancing the budget, honoring committments and protecting our enviroment? I have a higher opinion of decent Republicans than you do, bored now. And speaking of lapses of logic, to announce that petition gatherers in a Republican town are necessarily Republican is an unsupported leap of logic.
Carl Nyberg
· 3 years ago
bored now, I have attended a number of Green functions--although none recently--and I have never seen a GOP plant helping pull the oars.
Dorian has a fair point. The names of Whitney's circulators are public record. If you're gonna make a claim that Whitney used Republicans as circulators you ought to be able to get some names to make the case.
Just Wonderin'
· 3 years ago
Add me to the list of those voters that would like to see "the Greens" included. I certainly will take an increased interest in the debates if there are three involved. I'm interested in a position that is refreshingly different than the two "professional" party platforms (R=dismal and D=failure).
Carl Nyberg
· 3 years ago
A debate between JBT and Whitney is an interesting idea. But what if Whitney outshined the State Treasurer?
Anonymous
· 3 years ago
Yol, 4:50.
Rod couldn't have answered those questions this far in advance of the election. In fact, he didn't answer those questions until a few months into his "administration". Everybody was wondering what he was waiting for. Remember?
bored now
· 3 years ago
carl, that's a ridiculous proposal. i should waste *my* quite valuable time going through 39,000 names because a couple of naive idealists on a blog refuse to accept that it is a standard tactic for the republican party to use the greens as a way of dividing progressives? no thanks!
i'm not in the business of preserving people's belief structure. i don't pretend to be a reporter, and i couldn't care less if you or anyone else refuses to believe me. that's your problem, not mine. i like to know what is really going on in the world, not force it to conform to some pre-determined point of view. so i keep an open mind.
furthermore, the claim that this is a scurrilous charge is pretentious. of course republicans want to divide and conquer the left of center vote. it's an easy tactic.
sorry, free thinker, but your rush to follow the crowd demonstrates no independent thought here. whitney isn't that likely to take votes away from democrats. if there's one thing seared into the democratic consciousness, it's the belief that nader gave the 2000 election to bush. spend a few minutes in a focus group, and you'll hear this almost immediately. i seriously doubt you're getting real democrats to support your cause.
personally, i'm more of the belief that the greens will struggle to reach 5% of the vote. voters in this state are even more conditioned to the two party structure than elsewhere. welcome to the combine. the votes you get are likely to come from those people so disaffected with the system that they wouldn't have voted otherwise. and i seriously doubt that much more than 50% of those who choose "other" in that poll will end up voting in this race. they are *far* more likely to sit it out than vote for someone they don't know and a party they have no idea about.
finally, i didn't conclude that the green petitioners were republicans, I TOOK THEIR WORD FOR IT. i don't know them, and i don't care. i wasn't particularly surprised by their claim (i actually pay attention to election news and i know a little something about republican tactics), and saw no need to question it. while i have no reason to question their claim, i can also understand if green party members would seek out signatures in a gop stronghold by claiming to be republicans. but i think that's speculative.
i'm sorry to burst so many bubbles (who knew?), but you weren't promised a good choice, a fair choice or even a smart choice in this (or any) election, you were merely promised A CHOICE. i've run across the reasoning that everyone out there thinks just like you so often (there's actually a term for this assumption, self-similarity) that i can't say i'm surprised. i merely understand that it's an aberration.
that greens get organizational and/or financial support from republicans should surprise no one. and, quite frankly, greens should say, thank you, thank you, thank you! both republicans and greens share the same goal: to destroy the appeal of the democratic party to progressive voters. it's shocking, shocking i tell you!, that republicans are helping your cause. don't be so proud to refuse their help -- you'll need it...
M.V.
· 3 years ago
bored now, Blagojevich said himself that Republicans are qualified to run the state...so who he's working for? Is Blagojevich really a secret Republican? And, if he's a secret Republican, by your estimation, could that mean he secretly passed petitions for the Green Party??? Whoa...the whole thing's a conspiracy!!! You're really on to something there.
David P. Graf
· 3 years ago
I think the Greens should be in the debates to give it a bit of diversity. After all, there are already two Dems in the governor's race.
bored now
· 3 years ago
there, there, m.v. pick up your tin-foil hat at headquarters!
T$
· 3 years ago
"if Illinois was like California, we’d have more choices,"
Yeah. That's worked out pretty well there, hasn't it?
Kankakee Voice
· 3 years ago
Demand Whitney be included in the debates. Blago and Pinka don't want him in cuz he's cuter'n Rod (and god knows Judy!) and his articulation and intelligence will blow them both away. Not to mention how SQEAKY CLEAN his values and background are. A candidate I can feel good about voting for, it'll be a new experience!
Steve
· 3 years ago
Bored, I think you are confusing the Green party with the repub and dem wings of the corporate party. It's the corporate party wings that will readily compromise their integrity in order to keep one corporate party rule. They regularly collude together to jerrymander the districts and not allow third party candidates on the ballot, in the corporate media, and in the debates. The two corporate party wings both accept legal bribes from corporations. Many progressives have left the dems for those reasons. We are sick of politicians of low integrity that will do anything to win and are primarily concerned with enriching themselves. In my activity so far with the Greens we always take great care in not accepting campaign contributions or any other help from any other political parties. It seems like some on this blog enjoy all the low integrity politicking or at least enjoy talking about it and are so cynical they think all parties are that way. You may want to check out the Greens, our goal is to end the cycle of political corruption which is the root cause of many of the countries problems.
Truth monger
· 3 years ago
bored now... I was amazed when I read your fictional account of the Green petition drive. Speaking as someone who was actually present when every single notorized petition page petiton page was numbered and compiled for filing I didn't recognize any strangers. There weren't any "republican operatives" unless they were REALLY well disguised - as like, long standing, dues paying Green party members. As for your "story" about being approached by flagrant republicans, flaunting their GOP status in your neighborhood & asking for YOUR signature for a 3rd party candidates, yet you didn't feel comfortable asking their name - something just doesn't sound right about your story. One last note, while there were over 39,000 signatures filed, there weren't nearly that many petitioners. A small but dedicated petitioning crew of GREENS focused on gathering signatures. After removing candidates and open, active Green members who would easily show up on Yahoo searches it should be easy for BORED NOW to produce the evidence of these republican petitioners on these notorized sheets. It's all public record. How 'bout same, place tomorrow with some evidence to back up your crazy X-files claims. Which response will it be, sarcasm or running?
bored now
· 3 years ago
steve, it's hard to take your plea for reform seriously when your initial position is to divide progressives and to focus on irrelevant efforts instead of enacting real change. sorry that i don't care about how much care you take in the process. i'm really more results oriented...
bored now
· 3 years ago
sorry, dude pretending about truth. i stand by what i said. it was in fact what happened. you'll forgive me if i spend *my* time in the way i think best.
i'm sure you took as much care of preventing republican input as was taken in pennsylvania or washington state, etc. btw, it's no crime to ally yourself with republicans. both parties share the same goal. (not that there's anything wrong with that!)
Steve
· 3 years ago
bored, You keep talking about dividing progressives. By this I assume you are inferring that the Democratic Party is progressive. If you believe this you are seriously deluding yourself. Less than 10% of national dems are progressive. Look at their voting record. When one rises to the big leagues, a national nomination to the dem or repub wing of the corporate party, it's like winning the lottery. They will be awash in money until they leave office and any legal bribes they've accepted from corporations that they haven't spent they are legally allowed to transfer those millions to their own personal bank account. They will spend half their week, Friday – Monday, running around collecting legal bribes and they won't have to go far, as there are 30 times more corporate lobbyists then congress people in Washington. Oh, no time left to write legislation, no problem the army of lobbyists have plenty of time to do it for them. Dems and repubs are like the birthday child in the money booth trying to grab as much cash as they can before the time limit ends. Quite a popular nest egg generator for the integrity challenged.
You have as much chance to reform the dems and "enact real change" as you do to reform the mafia. How's it working for you so far?
bored now
· 3 years ago
your assumption is wrong. i'm talking about the people in the electorate who self-identify as liberal or progressive. iow, ~24% of the country. not all of them also self-identify as democrats (although many do).
and the rant about corporations does not do it for me. i tend to be sceptical of amassed power in general, not just that held by corporations. the marxist-like language just makes my eyes glaze over.
but i think delusional is an interesting word. after all, you and your co-horts are the ones who have made the exceptional claim (that greens have nothing to with republicans, despite the prolific evidence to the contrary), yet you seem appalled that i mentioned that fact.
the reason i took no note of the people making the claim that they were republicans who were passing your petition was because it was no surprise. it fit well within current (known) practice. your (collective) claim that the green party in illinois has a goose-step-like political organization with no possible connection to republicans -- despite the evidence of such connections elsewhere -- would be extremely exceptional. the enemy of my enemy is my ALLY (not my friend). it seems that you and your friends are not very familiar with the political environment in which you operate. i am...
Kathleen J. Cummings
· 3 years ago
If we live in a democracy, Whitney will be in the public debate.
If we live in a democracy, a third, fourth, fifth, etc. party will find it easier to get on the ballot.
The issues the Greens are bringing up are what the Dems and Repubs are afraid of, they might have to leave their cozy business as usual.
Chinaman
· 3 years ago
MV - Yes Blagojevich was a Republican turned Democrat. He was a hugh supporter of Eddie Vrdolyak. Rod ran the northside campaign to defeat Harold Washington. But true to the Blagojevich form. He decided Rod would go further as a Democrat in Cook County. This was a very easy decision for Rod because ethics and loyalty are not in his vocabulary. I continue to be amazed at the naive voters in this state. I know for a fact Rod Blagojevich seconds that opinion.
Eric
· 3 years ago
bored now-
I'm sick of your sourceless claims. If you do refuse to give a source, we have to assume you are making this all up. Anyone can say anything without a source and with no evidence. Where I come from, those people aren't taken seriously.
you claim this: that greens have nothing to with republicans, despite the prolific evidence to the contrary
Give me evidence that proves that the Illinois Green party is in fact in cahoots with Republicans.
I have been to the last several State Party Meetings and I know first hand that we have nothing to do with Republicans, and that the ideology of the Illinois Green Party is contrary to accepting that kind of "assitance".
Once again, give the evidence or you are lying.
Lareese
· 3 years ago
Bored now has CONVINCED me to vote Green. If he had any "prolific" evidence of GOP backing Greens he'd be buying billboard space and posting it. I know a ploy when I see it. Put up or shut up. BTW, I'm really bored with bored now....He just didn't want people to talk about Mr. Whitney as a candidate. I am going to Whitney's website AND finding out what I can do to include him in debates and polls. Thanks bored now, you've opened my eyes.
bored now
· 3 years ago
poor eric! i already gave you an answer, but since you seem unable to do independent research, here ya go:
and that's just from the first page! (i didn't even go to the second.)
i note your dishonest attempt to redefine *my* claim (presumably because you cannot refute it otherwise), but i will reiterate that i was approached by people circulating a petition for the green party who claimed to be republicans. i cannot vouch for the truthfulness of their claims, nor do i care. within the general context of rather substantial connections between green and republican party strategies, their claim made sense to me.
indeed, i am inclined to take it at face value since the opposite conclusion (that they were really greens claiming to be republicans in order to gather more support) requires a lot more political saavy than i've witnessed from greens in this thread. without evidence of unusually strict ideological enforcement by the green party of illinois, this seems the most obvious conclusion...
Ira
· 3 years ago
I'm with Lareese, BN clearly has NO evidence or he'd do a little more than talk about it - he'd show it. I had no idea the dems were this scared of Rich Whitney. It's clear now between this signature examination & refusing to debate that they are terrified - I can't wait to see Rich Whitney in the debates. I'm glad the Greens are on the ballot & look for them in the debates & polls.
bored now
· 3 years ago
you're welcome, lareese. it may surprise you, but i believe you have a right to vote for anyone you want! just as i believe it's ok for greens to be on the ballot (as long as they follow the rules and customs in place)! and that it's ok for the candidates of the major parties to set parameters for debates! it's how we play politics in this country.
if you want to crash the party, THEN CRASH THE PARTY. stop whining about not getting invited! topinka already said she'd debate. the proper answer to this is, YES! go set up the whitney-topinka debate!
if li'l ole me convinced you to vote green by exposing you to truth, well then -- good for me!
Rich Miller
· 3 years ago
OK, I'm closing comments on this post because I decided to check and realized that just one "Green" was posting as several different people. As a result, I declare Bored Now the winner of this little tiff and am putting the offending Greeny in automatic comment moderation for the foreseeable future.
Have a nice day.'
Oh, and Bored Now, you didn't convince Lareese to vote Green. She's already quite Green, aren't you AS?
All Comments
Though based on the latest news out of Pennsylvania, where the Green Party candidate for Senate appears to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party, I assume someone is checking Rich's financial campaign reports to see how many Republicans are backing him?
I'll have the Chicken a la Rod, please.
What an arrogant ass.
Im not saying this is a good or bad thing but thats just how it happens.
Make that two orders of the Chicken a la Rod.
The poll numbers clearly show Illinois voters want another option to G-Rod and JBT. So they probably want to know about the other candidate on the ballot.
Is it too much to ask for the media types to call Whitney's campaign for comments for the articles on the governor's race?
Whitney is a legitimate and credible candidate who deserves to be included in the debates and he has earned the opportunity to campaign on merit, rather than being bogged down with Democratic obstructionist strategizing.
Whitney's participation in the debates will elevate the discussion and cause both of the so-called-established parties' candidates to stop bickering between themselves and say something RELEVANT to Illinois voters. Whitney is not fringe! He is articulate and well researched. The Democrates and Rebublicans have good reason to think Whitney would make them look bad.
Please support Whitney's efforts by contacting upcoming debate sponsors and insisting that ALL gubernatorial candidates are invited to offer their policies and positions in the public areana. Also, please check out Whitney's website, INCLUDING position statements at whitneyforgov.org
Illinois Green and Growing!
Not much brains in either candidate
I still detest the man's politics.
Ashur Odishoo
Candidate
State Representative 11th District
Ummmm. Isn’t anyone else a little terrified by the implications of that phrase? Seems to me, “professional†corporate politics as usual is at the very root of most of the problems we face right now. In contrast, Mr. Whitney is a breath of fresh air. I, for one, would love to hear him in the debates, and I think he has definately earned the right to be there. But then, I am just a lowly registered voter. (And yes, I print on petitions VERY clearly and have been registered to vote at this address for over ten years--even if the Democrats see fit to challenge that fact as they urge everyone to “play by the rulesâ€Â!)
Don't vorry. Ve vill take care of ze little people, too.
I think the real agenda behind many of those who want to block Mr. Whitney from participating in the debate is that they know how corrupt and morally bankrupt the republican and democratic parties have become. They are afraid that many citizens are looking for a candidate and a party to vote for that is truly progressive and which has high integrity. They don't want voters to become aware that the Green party is truly progressive, has been against the Iraq war since before it started, is for campaign finance reform (publicly funded elections), instant runoff voting, environmental policies to reduce global climate change, fiscal responsibility, social security, gay marriage, the expansion of civil rights, women's reproductive rights, GLBT rights, making policy decisions based on science - not the bible, individual rights, third political parties, habeas corpus, due process, and against imperialism, torture and secret prisons.
Nowhere in the constitution does it say that there should only be two parties. Voting for the lesser of two evils guarantees a perpetually evil government. Throughout US history third parties have brought us almost all of our major social movements most of us are very proud of – abolition of slavery, women's right to vote, civil rights, 40 hour work week, worker's rights, environmental protections etc., etc. Many of these rights are now under attack and we need the help of third parties in the struggle to retain these hard fought rights.
Why not allow him in? He's not as coached and doesn't have the handlers that the dems and repubs do, so he'd be on his own against two entrenched, connected candidates.
Why should Blago fear Whitney? Rod and Judy have been groomed for this opportunity while Rich is a newcomer on the scene and will have to hold his own.
We've got 100 days to go and already 17% say they'd like to vote for someone besides the scandal-ridden D and R.
Voters deserve to hear from a candidate who was able to gain the approval of more than 39,000 Illinoisans to appear on the ballot. Hopefully he can hold his own against Rod and Judy.
i'm not sure why this is news to you. the connection between republicans and greens is fairly well-established...
Of course Whitney should be allowed in the debates. Then we would have a better chance of hearing real ideas, and not sound bitten platitudes.
the truth remains that republicans are using the green party for their own purposes (and why shouldn't they?) and this is fairly well-established. whether or not you choose to believe it doesn't make it any less true, it merely demonstrates your capacity for differentiating between truth and what you want to believe!
Oh, and while you're at it, dish me up a little more of that Chicken a la Rod.
I know that you're more than politically savvy, so I don't doubt your info. Folks are just asking for details. For all those dedicated (perhaps naive) greens who were working their behinds off to gather signatures, your statement needs more explanation. The "real" greens were also petitioning in heavily republican (and heavily democratic) areas.
What's your stance on the debates?
p.s. Sorry I didn't make it to your social on Saturday night. I've been under the weather this summer.
Grenadia makes the point again perhaps more clearly than I. People should be aware that the greens are propped up by any politcal party
i don't personally care about debates that i don't have candidates in. i don't find them informative, i don't know many voters who watch them, and i don't think we can legitimately call them debates (joint news conferences more like it). so have at it!
i don't personally find the republican's use of greens reprehensible, nor is it a secret. a quick google comes up with plenty of stories where republicans used green efforts and candidates to undermine democrats, and that search can be replicated by anyone interested. of course republicans want to divide progressives, and there's been more than one green party leader willing to allow that to occur. this isn't rocket science.
i've already made it clear, both here and elsewhere, that while i don't care for rod, and i don't see a chance for anyone else to win (without an indictment of the guv by fitzgerald), i also can't count on illinois republicans continuing to be the most disorganized and fractured political "organization" i've come across. illinois is not so blue that progressives can afford to elect republicans because this state (like a lot of states) will be "in play" in 2008 should the democrats foolishly nominate hilliary clinton.
while i've not played on this side of the fence for long, i am still wedded to the conclusion that democrats tend towards the foolish course, whenever possible. the question i have to answer is this: can we afford to elect another republican to the white house? can we afford to perpetuate the bush doctrine of pre-emption? i have to answer 'no' to these questions, and thus, *i* cannot afford to vote for anyone other than a democrat as governor (regardless of how flawed he is) in 2006. the stakes are simply too high. others clearly are making other calculations...
Is Blagojevich afraid of Rich Whitney, or does he just think that he's too good to debate? If a third-party candidate can make it onto the ballot in Illinois, they have already demonstrated a great deal of support and deserve to debate!
What's wrong Rod? Chickenovich?
Or maybe you've just had too much of that tasty Chicken a la Rod.
i'm not aware that the greens are organized sufficiently to be controlled by anyone. i understand that you're trying to dismiss these comments by making them as absurd as possible, but i'm talking about the greens being *used* by republicans. i don't think any serious person would disagree with that. and why shouldn't republicans try to divide progressives? it's a smart strategy, and it's been successful. i don't assume my opponent is stupid; neither should you...
The problem with this is that the polls which are being conducted are refusing to include Rich Whitney in the polls. This isn't a minor point. You can't work your way up the polls if the polls shut you out.
Any poll which excludes Rich Whitney at this point is a biased poll. Period. There is overwhelming evidence at this point that Whitney and the rest of the Green slate will be on the ballot. If you see a poll which isn't including Whitney, complain to the publication that published it, or complain directly to the polling firm.
Go back and re-read Carl Nyberg's comments. It's great that the media isn't totally blacking Whitney out right now, but what we're seeing still isn't good enough. Fair elections require fair media access. And that definitely means being included in the published polls.
I was in Chicago defending Green party petitions and heard some of the crazy attempts to link the Greens with the Republicans there too, like the yarn you're spinning on how they circulated our petitions. Illinois voters see that these "stories" are part of the politics of fear that just don't work anymore. Let's talk issues. When you respond with a sarcastism it will just sound like the death throes of a dying party!!!
Let Rich Debate!!
bored now... how does voting for Rod translate into Hillary 2008 and / or Repbulican victory in 2008. Hillary is a terrible idea for a candidate. Wouldn't a strong showing for the Greens help to wake the Dems up that they can't keep sending up these middle of the road conservatives for presidential races?
greens are controlled by republicans maybe no one will ever talk about issues or put the other candidates on the spot about things that matter to voters
bored now seems VERY SCARED of the greens
i wonder why? Who could bored now be, let's say affiliated with?
There should be set standards, though, and any candidate meeting those standards should be allowed and welcomed to participate. A sitting Governor should not be the person dictating those standards.
I say, let Greens debate! It'll surely spice things up a bit and make those debates quite a lot more entertaining. Maybe even get Topinka and Blago to discuss some real issues. That's the whole point right?
Craig: What one issue would that be? If you've looked at any of our websites or campaign literature you might notice that from the national party down to our local candidates a range of issues are covered. Energy, education, health, the war, etc. I urge you to go to http://gp.org/platform.shtml or http://whitneyforgov.org/platform.htm and see just how many issues we truly cover. In fact, it's easier to find detailed information on the Green Party's positions then it is for the Republican or Democratic parties.
Bored now: Go check out our filing. If Republicans were truly backing us we'd probably have a lot more money then we actually do. Also, as someone who gathered well over 1000 signatures to see Rich Whitney on the ballot I am completely insulted by the claim that anyone other then a Green supporter helped in gathering signatures. You are either completely dillusional or trying to spin-doctor people into thinking something that is obviously unfounded.
There is something wrong in this state if a candidate can collect over 39,000 signatures in 90 days and still not be allowed fair access to the debates.
Also, it's interesting to note that the most watched debate in the history of televised debates was in 1992 when Perot was allowed to participate. The people want to see more choices.
Could it be the non-qualified hacks that were hired because dems and $$$ contributors.
give me a break.
The spoiler argument is a lie, and the Democratic leadership knows it. Greens energize NEW voters, who would not otherwise vote and who would certainly not vote for Chicken a la Rod.
It seems to me that the Democratic leadership is doing a lot more harm to the party by using all of these antidemocratic tactics. I don't think that a good number of the activists, ministers, civic leaders, and elected officals will be so quick to support an organization that has accused them of not being registered to vote, living at the wrong address, and forging their own signatures.
The bells are tolling, and the Democratic Machine is pounding the nails into its own coffin here.
I believe the Illinois Green Party can do a better job managing our state. The Greens have my vote, and I hope they earn yours!
This just in...SBoE has Greens at 28,000+ valid signatures, Dem legal counsel (supposedly working PRO BONO! hahahaha) says he cannot possibly rehabilitate 3,000 signatures. Ready to toss in his hat and let the SBoE certify Greens on the state slate.
It is a sad, sad day to be a member of the Democratic leadership. More sad days lie ahead.
BTW...Does ANYONE believe Mike Kasper works for Blagojevich without being paid?
I agree that there should be standards, and I encourage those media outlets or whoever is running the debates to publish those standards so that everyone know what they are. If it depends on polls, then I'd like to see polls with Rich Whitney included. People keep talking about the 17% poll, but that did not mention Whitney - it merely said none of the above. And, really, if you think about that, it's pretty sad, for them, that 17% of the people would like ANYONE BUT Rod and JBT!
Kasper does not work for Blagojevich. He works for Madigan.
One way or another, he gets paid.
And speaking of lapses of logic, to announce that petition gatherers in a Republican town are necessarily Republican is an unsupported leap of logic.
Dorian has a fair point. The names of Whitney's circulators are public record. If you're gonna make a claim that Whitney used Republicans as circulators you ought to be able to get some names to make the case.
Rod couldn't have answered those questions this far in advance of the election. In fact, he didn't answer those questions until a few months into his "administration". Everybody was wondering what he was waiting for. Remember?
i'm not in the business of preserving people's belief structure. i don't pretend to be a reporter, and i couldn't care less if you or anyone else refuses to believe me. that's your problem, not mine. i like to know what is really going on in the world, not force it to conform to some pre-determined point of view. so i keep an open mind.
furthermore, the claim that this is a scurrilous charge is pretentious. of course republicans want to divide and conquer the left of center vote. it's an easy tactic.
sorry, free thinker, but your rush to follow the crowd demonstrates no independent thought here. whitney isn't that likely to take votes away from democrats. if there's one thing seared into the democratic consciousness, it's the belief that nader gave the 2000 election to bush. spend a few minutes in a focus group, and you'll hear this almost immediately. i seriously doubt you're getting real democrats to support your cause.
personally, i'm more of the belief that the greens will struggle to reach 5% of the vote. voters in this state are even more conditioned to the two party structure than elsewhere. welcome to the combine. the votes you get are likely to come from those people so disaffected with the system that they wouldn't have voted otherwise. and i seriously doubt that much more than 50% of those who choose "other" in that poll will end up voting in this race. they are *far* more likely to sit it out than vote for someone they don't know and a party they have no idea about.
finally, i didn't conclude that the green petitioners were republicans, I TOOK THEIR WORD FOR IT. i don't know them, and i don't care. i wasn't particularly surprised by their claim (i actually pay attention to election news and i know a little something about republican tactics), and saw no need to question it. while i have no reason to question their claim, i can also understand if green party members would seek out signatures in a gop stronghold by claiming to be republicans. but i think that's speculative.
i'm sorry to burst so many bubbles (who knew?), but you weren't promised a good choice, a fair choice or even a smart choice in this (or any) election, you were merely promised A CHOICE. i've run across the reasoning that everyone out there thinks just like you so often (there's actually a term for this assumption, self-similarity) that i can't say i'm surprised. i merely understand that it's an aberration.
that greens get organizational and/or financial support from republicans should surprise no one. and, quite frankly, greens should say, thank you, thank you, thank you! both republicans and greens share the same goal: to destroy the appeal of the democratic party to progressive voters. it's shocking, shocking i tell you!, that republicans are helping your cause. don't be so proud to refuse their help -- you'll need it...
Blagojevich said himself that Republicans are qualified to run the state...so who he's working for? Is Blagojevich really a secret Republican? And, if he's a secret Republican, by your estimation, could that mean he secretly passed petitions for the Green Party??? Whoa...the whole thing's a conspiracy!!! You're really on to something there.
Yeah. That's worked out pretty well there, hasn't it?
I think you are confusing the Green party with the repub and dem wings of the corporate party. It's the corporate party wings that will readily compromise their integrity in order to keep one corporate party rule. They regularly collude together to jerrymander the districts and not allow third party candidates on the ballot, in the corporate media, and in the debates. The two corporate party wings both accept legal bribes from corporations. Many progressives have left the dems for those reasons. We are sick of politicians of low integrity that will do anything to win and are primarily concerned with enriching themselves. In my activity so far with the Greens we always take great care in not accepting campaign contributions or any other help from any other political parties. It seems like some on this blog enjoy all the low integrity politicking or at least enjoy talking about it and are so cynical they think all parties are that way. You may want to check out the Greens, our goal is to end the cycle of political corruption which is the root cause of many of the countries problems.
I was amazed when I read your fictional account of the Green petition drive. Speaking as someone who was actually present when every single notorized petition page petiton page was numbered and compiled for filing I didn't recognize any strangers. There weren't any "republican operatives" unless they were REALLY well disguised - as like, long standing, dues paying Green party members. As for your "story" about being approached by flagrant republicans, flaunting their GOP status in your neighborhood & asking for YOUR signature for a 3rd party candidates, yet you didn't feel comfortable asking their name -
something just doesn't sound right about your story.
One last note, while there were over 39,000 signatures filed, there weren't nearly that many petitioners. A small but dedicated petitioning crew of GREENS focused on gathering signatures. After removing candidates and open, active Green members who would easily show up on Yahoo searches it should be easy for BORED NOW to produce the evidence of these republican petitioners on these notorized sheets. It's all public record. How 'bout same, place tomorrow with some evidence to back up your crazy X-files claims. Which response will it be, sarcasm or running?
i'm sure you took as much care of preventing republican input as was taken in pennsylvania or washington state, etc. btw, it's no crime to ally yourself with republicans. both parties share the same goal. (not that there's anything wrong with that!)
You keep talking about dividing progressives. By this I assume you are inferring that the Democratic Party is progressive. If you believe this you are seriously deluding yourself. Less than 10% of national dems are progressive. Look at their voting record. When one rises to the big leagues, a national nomination to the dem or repub wing of the corporate party, it's like winning the lottery. They will be awash in money until they leave office and any legal bribes they've accepted from corporations that they haven't spent they are legally allowed to transfer those millions to their own personal bank account. They will spend half their week, Friday – Monday, running around collecting legal bribes and they won't have to go far, as there are 30 times more corporate lobbyists then congress people in Washington. Oh, no time left to write legislation, no problem the army of lobbyists have plenty of time to do it for them. Dems and repubs are like the birthday child in the money booth trying to grab as much cash as they can before the time limit ends. Quite a popular nest egg generator for the integrity challenged.
You have as much chance to reform the dems and "enact real change" as you do to reform the mafia. How's it working for you so far?
and the rant about corporations does not do it for me. i tend to be sceptical of amassed power in general, not just that held by corporations. the marxist-like language just makes my eyes glaze over.
but i think delusional is an interesting word. after all, you and your co-horts are the ones who have made the exceptional claim (that greens have nothing to with republicans, despite the prolific evidence to the contrary), yet you seem appalled that i mentioned that fact.
the reason i took no note of the people making the claim that they were republicans who were passing your petition was because it was no surprise. it fit well within current (known) practice. your (collective) claim that the green party in illinois has a goose-step-like political organization with no possible connection to republicans -- despite the evidence of such connections elsewhere -- would be extremely exceptional. the enemy of my enemy is my ALLY (not my friend). it seems that you and your friends are not very familiar with the political environment in which you operate. i am...
If we live in a democracy, a third, fourth, fifth, etc. party will find it easier to get on the ballot.
The issues the Greens are bringing up are what the Dems and Repubs are afraid of, they might have to leave their cozy business as usual.
I'm sick of your sourceless claims. If you do refuse to give a source, we have to assume you are making this all up. Anyone can say anything without a source and with no evidence. Where I come from, those people aren't taken seriously.
you claim this:
that greens have nothing to with republicans, despite the prolific evidence to the contrary
Give me evidence that proves that the Illinois Green party is in fact in cahoots with Republicans.
I have been to the last several State Party Meetings and I know first hand that we have nothing to do with Republicans, and that the ideology of the Illinois Green Party is contrary to accepting that kind of "assitance".
Once again, give the evidence or you are lying.
BTW, I'm really bored with bored now....He just didn't want people to talk about Mr. Whitney as a candidate. I am going to Whitney's website AND finding out what I can do to include him in debates and polls. Thanks bored now, you've opened my eyes.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gre...
Green candidate got all his money from Republicans
Greens say Republicans crashed their party
GOP aids Green candidate Carl Romanelli
Green Party in New Mexico Goes From Gadfly to Player
and that's just from the first page! (i didn't even go to the second.)
i note your dishonest attempt to redefine *my* claim (presumably because you cannot refute it otherwise), but i will reiterate that i was approached by people circulating a petition for the green party who claimed to be republicans. i cannot vouch for the truthfulness of their claims, nor do i care. within the general context of rather substantial connections between green and republican party strategies, their claim made sense to me.
indeed, i am inclined to take it at face value since the opposite conclusion (that they were really greens claiming to be republicans in order to gather more support) requires a lot more political saavy than i've witnessed from greens in this thread. without evidence of unusually strict ideological enforcement by the green party of illinois, this seems the most obvious conclusion...
I had no idea the dems were this scared of Rich Whitney. It's clear now between this signature examination & refusing to debate that they are terrified - I can't wait to see Rich Whitney in the debates.
I'm glad the Greens are on the ballot & look for them in the debates & polls.
if you want to crash the party, THEN CRASH THE PARTY. stop whining about not getting invited! topinka already said she'd debate. the proper answer to this is, YES! go set up the whitney-topinka debate!
if li'l ole me convinced you to vote green by exposing you to truth, well then -- good for me!
Have a nice day.'
Oh, and Bored Now, you didn't convince Lareese to vote Green. She's already quite Green, aren't you AS?