CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Guv says no Greens in debates

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Rich Miller — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:28:03 -0000

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?

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:27:43 -0000

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!

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Ira — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:21:59 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:18:20 -0000

poor eric! i already gave you an answer, but since you seem unable to do independent research, here ya go:

http://www.google.com/searc...

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...

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Lareese — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 09:15:06 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Eric — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:58:39 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Chinaman — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:37:12 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Kathleen J. Cummings — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:05:26 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 07:13:12 -0000

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...

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Steve — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 01:14:27 -0000

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 Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 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?

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 00:24:24 -0000

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!)

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 00:17:49 -0000

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...

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Truth monger — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 00:05:17 -0000

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?

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Steve — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 23:36:06 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Kankakee Voice — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 23:32:58 -0000

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!

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

T$ — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 23:24:14 -0000

"if Illinois was like California, weÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d have more choices,"

Yeah. That's worked out pretty well there, hasn't it?

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 23:02:33 -0000

there, there, m.v. pick up your tin-foil hat at headquarters!

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

David P. Graf — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:56:58 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

M.V. — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:20:16 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

bored now — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:19:09 -0000

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...

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Anonymous — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:17:27 -0000

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?

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Carl Nyberg — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:13:57 -0000

A debate between JBT and Whitney is an interesting idea. But what if Whitney outshined the State Treasurer?

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Just Wonderin' — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:13:12 -0000

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).

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Carl Nyberg — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:11:50 -0000

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.

Re: Guv says no Greens in debates

Free Thinker — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 20:51:37 -0000

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.