Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, a Democrat who is technically still running for president, announced this morning he's joining the Libertarian Party.
Dear friend,I wanted to update you on my latest plans before news gets out. Today, I am announcing my plan to join the Libertarian Party, because the Democratic Party no longer represents my vision for our great country. I wanted my supporters to get this news first, because you have been the ones who have kept my campaign alive since I first declared my candidacy on April 17, 2006.
The fact is, the Democratic Party today is no longer the party of FDR. It is a party that continues to sustain war, the military-industrial complex and imperialism — all of which I find anathema to my views.
By and large, I have been repeatedly marginalized in both national debates and in media exposure by the Democratic leadership, which works in tandem with the corporate interests that control what we read and hear in the media.
I look forward to advancing my presidential candidacy within the Libertarian Party, which is considerably closer to my values, my foreign policy views and my domestic views.
Please take a moment to make your most generous donation to my presidential campaign today. $10, $20, $50 — whatever you feel you can afford.
I want to thank you all for your continued support.
Gratefully yours,
Mike
Speaking of third party presidential hopefuls, here is an excerpt from the latest note from former Rep. Cynthia McKinney, also running for president. Read her full commentary here.
A Discussion of Race Worth Having Much has been made around the edges of this campaign of the issue of race. Sadly, nothing has been made of the public policy exigencies that arise because of the urgent racial disparities that continue to exist in our country....
I am deeply offended that in the middle of a Presidential campaign, remarks — be they from a pastor or a communications mogul, or a former Vice Presidential nominee — are the cause of a focus on race, and not the deep racial disparities that communities are forced to endure on a daily basis in this country.
...
This moment sheds light on a much-needed discussion: on race and the legacies of race and slavery and the continuing problems associated with our failure to treat racism as a curable American disease.
I am glad that candidate Obama mentioned the existing racial disparities in education, income, wealth, jobs, government services, imprisonment, and opportunity. Now it is time to address the public policies necessary to resolve these disparities. Now it is time to have the discussion on how we are going to come together and put policies in effect that will provide real hope and real opportunity to all in this country.
To narrow the gap between the ideals of our founding fathers and the realities faced by too many in our country today: That must be the role of public policy at this critical moment in our country today.
I welcome a real discussion of race in this country and a resolve to end the long-standing disparities that continue to spoil the greatness of our country. I welcome a real discussion of all the issues that face our country today and the real public policy options that exist to resolve them. That must be the measure of this campaign season. For many voters, this important discussion has been too vague or completely non-existent. Now is the time to talk about the concrete measures that will move our country forward: on race, war, climate change, the economy, health care, and education. Our votes and our political engagement must be about ensuring that fairness truly for all is embodied in "liberty and justice for all."
Paid for by the
Power to the People Committee
Cynthia McKinney for President
— Christina Bellantoni, national political reporter, The Washington Times
Comments (4)
When did race become an issue? When Obama began talking about it!!! When did healthcare become issue? When Clinton began talking about it!!! When did the climate change become an issue? When the U.N. saw it as a perpetual source of funding and the foundation for global governance, i.e. when Chirac spoke of it!!!! It started out as global warming but when the hockey stick broke, it became climate change, ta da, a state of fear model carried over from Y2K to fund global governance, that noone can tie a measure of effectiveness to. None of the above issues have anything to do with reality or the candidates could substantively tell us what they are going to do to resolve them. The more we listen the less we hear.
Posted by Larry Stone | March 26, 2008 11:53 AM
Re: Your article about "the Blunders of Hillary Clinton"
How about giving your good buddy Obama similar space in your rag? How about "the Blunders of Obama"
Thanks! I think
Posted by zieras7 | April 3, 2008 5:17 PM
YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE!!!
SUPER DELEGATE CLASS 101
LESSON AND POP QUIZ #001a (REV. May 19, 2008)
SHAME! SHAME!! SHAME!!! on any Super Delegate who announces their �vote� or �endorsement� for any candidate prior to the August 2008 Convention!!!
Why? You ask? The short answer is, it shows that the inmates are running the asylum.
Because Super Delegates are or should reflect the concience, maturity and wisdom of the party, they should be the sober and mature reflection or the brains of the Democrats to nominate when necessary their candidate to best represent the Party in the election. Let�s face it, the most Democrat Platformed Democrat would never be elected by all of the people in a General Election, i.e. the �Granddaddy� Ted Kennedy already tried that and screwed up the 1980 Presidential Election and got Jimmy Carter defeated. (N.B. - Democrats, Republicans and Independents get to vote in the same election for the General Election.) Let�s face it! What is needed here is sober and mature reflection and not hype and tingles up our legs. I have even heard one Super Delegate say, �I don�t know, there is just something about him.� What??? Please! We need quite a bit more than that; unless the Democrats like �losing� Presidential Elections. There have been only two Democrats elected to two terms since 1932. You got it! Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932 and William Jefferson Clinton in 1992. Others have tried and failed. Truman declined his second bid. John Fitzgerald Kennedy very, very unfortunately and tragically did not get that opportunity. Lyndon Baines Johnson even had to announce on March 31, 1968 that he would neither seek nor accept his party�s nomination as their president and Jimmy Carter lost his bid (maybe thanks to Ted). In our reflection we would be remiss not to consider soberly the last two Presidential Elections against �the village idiot.� Al Gore and John Kerry could not even get their first term. The losers John Kerry and John Edwards I see have announced their early endorsement. Should we listen to these two losers??? What do they know about getting elected? I have heard that the last two-term elected Democrat President has supported one of the candidates and made the statement that the candidate he supports in his opinion is the �most qualified� presidential candidate ever � including himself! Maybe he knows something worth the Super Delegates checking out. Maybe they should ask the last two-term Democrat President what he thinks. After all he left office with a greater than 65% approval rating among all people (higher ratings than both Kennedy and Reagan.) I wonder if the Reagan Democrats voted for him. I wonder if he could get them for the candidate he supports? Maybe we should just check that out.
Contrary to popular sentiment the nominating process or a Primary Process is not �a game� or �a contest� in the competitive sense. It is �an evaluation process� to decide and evaluate who is the best candidate to represent the Party in the election. Unlike �a game� where the rules must be applied evenly and fairly to determine the valid truthful winner, a �nominating process� is �a process� not �a game�. I know we like to use the term �won the race� but it is neither �a race� nor �a game.� If it is a process, then the rules become �procedural� and not �substantive�. In a game, the rules are �substantive� and not �procedural.� In a game you can decide who should go first; that�s �procedural.� To know who won the game; we must follow �the substantive rules.� Florida and Michigan violated �procedural rules� not �substantive rules� so to �forfeit� their votes and delegates is not an option. A penalty is the only option. If you get a speeding ticket on the way to work you still get to go to work and just pay a fine later. (Who took their own name off the Michigan ballot?) As was proved in the last two elections the most popular nominee does not always get elected in the General.
The super Delegates are like the jury in a trial. They are not to declare or indicate whether they support the Plaintiff or the Defendant. They are to wait until all the factors are presented and considered, yes, and sometimes they argue behind �closed doors.� Yes, with not only the public excluded, but the trial lawyers and the trial judge are not even privy to their deliberations. (Can you picture the jurors holding thumbs up or thumbs down during the trial? It would make for great theatre but be bad for business. Even the Romans waited until the fight was over before they did either thumbs up or thumbs down. Maybe we should try that. Who knows, we just might get the most electable candidate ever. After losing two, maybe it�s time for the Nominating Process to try something new; unless of course the Democrats like losing Presidential Elections. I know, I know, sometimes I am just a smart _ _ _. *) When you consider the issues and crisis and wars at hand, it is time to take very, very serious and sober deliberations, evaluations and considerations as to who is best qualified to not only get elected with all folk but also which candidate has the best and most qualified advisors, support staff and experience to intelligently and maturely deal with those crisis which face our Beloved United States of America today.
Had enough? I could go on and on. I am just getting warmed up. If the best and most qualified candidate is not nominated by this Democrat Convention in August 2008 there will be a great exodus of Democrats old and newly signed up ones leaving the Democrat Party till �THE PARTY� gets off their �state of stupid� and returns to sober, mature and intelligent judgment. This is by no means a threat in any way form or fashion. Consider it prophecy or prophetic. No one likes being associated with �stupid� or �loser.� It just tastes bad. It could be worse; the Democrats could be labeled �Stupid Losers.� Yuk!!!! BAA BAA! What do they say about three time losers? In California we put three time �losers� in prison for life.
Thank you and God Bless you and your supporters for reading this and sending it on to other Super Delegates!
PLEASE CIRCULATE THIS MEMO ASAP WHILE THERE IS STILL TIME!!!
Very, very patriotically and Democratically yours,
jw (jwwilk1@adelphia.net 949-650-7702
Please note: There will be a pop-quiz to follow. (See next page.)
* See what rush to judgment does! The word for the blank is �guy.� Got ya!
SUPER DELEGATE CLASS 101
(POP QUIZ ON LESSON #001 May 19,2008)
POP QUIZ TO TEST FOR �STUPID�!
1. Why do we have Super Delegates? __________________________________________.
(If it is to follow the will of the voters, that would be superfluous for they would be merely �perfunctory.� Then that�s �Stupid� at work!)
2. If we eliminated �perfunctory� Super Delegates and instead went with the rule whoever received the most votes in a State gets all the Delegates from that State, who would have more Delegates at the present time? __________________________________________.
(Now isn�t that more �Stupid� not to employ the �winner take all� method, and instead go with �perfunctory� delegates who do not necessarily follow the popular vote of either their State or District?)
3. Which nominee has won more States? ___________________________________.
(Does that standard make Idaho and Utah equal to New York and California?
Then that�s really more �Stupid� at work!)
(In the words of Ron White; �You can�t fix stupid!� In the words of jw; �It�s grossly �Stupid� to ignore �Stupid� or, at the least, not try to fix �Stupid.�) In the spirit of the words of St. John; �Blessed are those who read and hear these words and take them to heart and keep those things which are written herein; for the time is at hand.�
PLEASE LIST AND ATTACH YOUR COMMENTS OR REASONS HERE:
Posted by JW | May 19, 2008 11:19 PM
You have no idea of how many prayers I am going to say for you guys and gals. Thank you!!!!
The "Not so famous" jw
Posted by jw | May 20, 2008 10:29 PM