JJ,

This could take a while, and longer than I have at the moment. We’ve also discussed it at lenghth on other threads, but I realize that it is something that does have to continue, as new participants come to the table.

So, let me say only for the moment, what is ‘right’ with Ron Paul, that I personally believe from his rhetoric.

It is ‘right’ or ‘correct’ or ‘presumed preferrable’ to a majority of the population, that Ron Paul would extract our MILITARY from these foreign entanglements, or what I call wars of Imperial Agression. IOW, he SAYS that he would get us out of Iraq. (but so do other candidates, most recently John Edwards) Obama and Hillary claim that they will as well, but haven’t come up with any committed plans to do that. (I’m not buying Hillary’s about a couple of brigades every few months, until ‘most’ of them are out). I also haven’t seen a specific ‘plan’ from Ron Paul, on exactly how he plans these logistics, but let’s just assume that he’s ‘sincere’ in saying that he’s going to get them all out and immediately, since he claims that he doesn’t approve of any foreign involvements.

And, that’s what’s ‘right’ with Ron Paul. He says he’ll get the troops out of Iraq. (I guess).

Other than that, everything else about his policies and postions are WRONG, and would lead to a complete breakdown of the republic, as a result of his ‘survival of the fittest’ philosophy, or ‘rugged individualism’ or ‘sink or swim’ mentality to the entire 300 million of us.

I’ll get back to the other ‘wrongs later.

Actually, for the record the Communications Act of 1934, that act was replaced by the Telecommunications Act of 1996:

http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.txt

It’s good that we can read this online, because it shows us exactly where things stand.  I already posted the following analysis as a comment on The Huffington Post.  However, it is buried so deep in other comments that I suspect I can reproduce it here:

As far as I can tell, the operative text [in the 1996 version] is in Title II of Part III: “Nothing in this section shall be construed as relieving a television broadcasting station from its obligation to serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” Note the language specific to “a television broadcasting station.” Title II is concerned strictly with broadcast services; and Title III (cable services) contains no language about “the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” In other words the decision of the Nevada Supreme Court basically rests on the fact that a cable channel, rather than a broadcasting station, provided the content. I wish it were otherwise, but that is the way the law got written.

As a democratic socialist I agree with Kucinich far more than Clinton or Obama on the issues. Unfortunately, the fact is that Kucinich and his supporters posting here, including me, are much more progressive than the country as a whole. That is the main reason we are “marginalized”, not because there is a corporate conspiracy to marginalize us. I see Obama as the best chance to get more progressive ideas into the “mainstream”,and that is why I have been supporting him.

Well, yes, the *presidential* election, in my view, has become quaint.  Except that it does provide a venue for people like me and you to vent.

This should not discourage people for informing themselves about local issues, which are still very much in play and important.

Governorships and senate seats?  Not sure…but the Schwarzenegger election was a classic case of Wall Street allying with the MSM to get what they want.  Arnold’s latest attempts to service the Street’s needs are all too transparent.  Maybe the voters California will see through this and reject it - but it’s going to be a tough battle.

Not at all, antispin, I understood it as such—just thought I would add to your point.

Well, yeah, prezackly my point, which perhaps was made with tongue too firmly in cheek?

Yeah, right antispin, 1934 was a long time ago, and 1787 was even a longer time ago.  Hell all those little things like separation of powers, constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, the first amendment rights of speech, assembly, freedom of and from religion and other documents like the ban on torture embodied in the Geneva Conventions can all now be described as “quaint” as we move toward the fascist end to history.  Come to think of it, if we’re going to allow corporations like MSNBC to police the political landscape, preventing alternative views from being heard, let alone debated, why don’t we chuck this entire experiment we call democracy and appoint Dick Cheney dictator for life.  After all, haven’t elections themselves become “quaint”?

Did anyone catch what the heckler at the debate said around 9:15 EST?

Well, 1934 was a long, long time ago.  A more quaint and idyllic age when people didn’t need to worry themselves so much about the complexities of maintaining corporate power.  For that matter 1787, was even ages longer ago.  Perhaps we should just replace the FCC with MSNBC and let the experts handle these intricate matters.

ITW: your bray is assinine as ever.  None of the other candidates is nearly a tenth as articulate as DK.

TW, et al:

You may not believe this but I think Kucinich SHOULD be allowed into the debate.  Why not? What to HRC, Obama and Edwards have to fear from him???? 

And if they DO have something I want to know it.

Besides, DK provides both comic relief and coverage against the charge that only party insiders get to be treated as candidates.

I think DK couldn’t manage a hot dog stand, much less the nation (but he’s STILL far more qualified than Chimpy McFlightsuit…), but all MSNBC has done is give him MORE stature.  If their goal was to prevent him distracting attention from the Big 3, it sure has backfired!

Besides, I believe the more Dennis Kucinich stands on a public national stage, the more Democrats will realize the choice is really Hillary or Barack.

Apparently I am not the only one out of touch with the Federal Communications Act of 1934!

Well, no doubt the other candidates will object to the grossly unfair exclusion.

This is an extremely important point.  I stand corrected.  My own “excuse” is that the current FCC seems so out of touch with its 1934 mandate that I am afraid I lost touch with it myself!

News flash - The Nevada Supreme Court has ruled in favor of NBC. Kucinich is out of the debate.

Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You have it backwards Mr. Smoliar.  This is not about NBC’s right of free speech, it is about the responsibility originally included within the Federal Communications Act of 1934 that required an exercise in civil responsibility as part of the price the media conglomerates should pay for the right to their monopoly licenses to broadcast over the “public” airwaves.  As noted by Bill Moyers, the Act was intended to protect the “public interest” by preventing “a monopoly of commercial values from overwhelming democratic values:  to insure that the official view of reality—commercial and government—was not the only view of reality that reached the people.”

MSNBC, whose parent company, GE, is the world’s second largest arms manufacturer has a vested interest in excluding a candidate whose policies directly challenge not only the military-industrial complex but the increasing consolidation of control of what Americans see, hear and read by six mega-conglomerates and the PR industry.  It is the consolidation of control rather than Judge Thompson’s ruling that stands as the greatest threat to the very survival of the First Amendment as the corporatocracy exercise controls over reality that would have been the envy of George Orwell fictional “Party” in “1984.”

Convoluted financing.                     
                                   
For some reason the ability to raise campaign money (beg) equates with presidential leadership as long as the candidate follows the media’s talking points.

As long as media is broadcast over public airways and the cable traverses private and public property, the mainstream media is beholden to the American taxpayer.

Unbias Judges recognize the need to enforce public domain issues as important as elections and justfully deny electioneering as the media would like.

Interesting term here Sue on the ‘technicality’ of the Kucinich candidacy. How do YOU figure that he is ‘technically’ not in the race? His name is on the ballots in my state and multiple others, so how did YOU decide the ‘technicality’ of this issue?

And, it’s not really a matter of whether YOU acknowledge if it’s ‘fair’ or not either, eh?

See, we’re really only just getting into this. 2 states have already decided, and there are 48 others in this mix, so you don’t really know what his chances might be. Matter of fact, here on the Western front, your own candidate didn’t do all that hot in Iowa. She came in THIRD behind Obama and Edwards. So, maybe we should send HER home, to New York, or Arkansas, or wherever else she might want to be, bypassing OUR real estate in Washington, DC.

Meantime, the rest of us want to hear what Kucinich has to say, specifically as it is stacked up next to the glamour candidates that the media has already selected for us, based on what the oligarchy tells them we should have. Some of us would like to choose for ourselves.

So, we don’t think he’s making a ‘fool’ of himself, and even if he was, that’s really not your concern, now is it?

Let me step back from this argument over CHUTZPAH to affirm that I believe strongly in freedom of the press.  However, I grew up in a climate in which civics was taught in the context of the RIGHTS AND DUTIES of the citizen.  In other words, while the First Amendment guarantees certain rights, it is within the framework that Congress shall make no law infringing on those rights.  The Judiciary, on the other hand, going as high as the Supreme Court, has handed down decisions on cases which dispute whether or not one of those rights has been exercised RESPONSIBLY.  This is why I would be happy to see an appeal escalate Judge Thompson’s decision to the Nevada Supreme Court.  As I see it, the Judge based his ruling on his opinion that NBC Universal was not acting responsibly in the interest of Nevada voters.  The Nevada Supreme Court has the legal authority to reject Judge Thompson’s reasoning.  Ruling in the Judge’s favor would be one small step towards restoring the role of journalism as a public trust, rather than simply a revenue stream for a media conglomerate;  but I can certainly see NBC Universal making a case that Judge Thompson is denying them the right of freedom of the press.  Note, also, that if NBC Universal files their appeal and that appeal is rejected, then that rejection constitutes a DE FACTO decision by the Nevada Supreme Court!

I would rather see this as Kucinich spending his money in order to make his voice heard.  Even if he only has a handful of delegates, that still means he has representation on the convention floor.  The presence of those delegates will make it at least a little harder to write him off the agenda.  They may even provide him with a bit of leverage with the Platform Committee.  My personal philosophy is:  If you can afford to play by the rules and if you obey those rules, then you do not deserve to have those rules pulled out from under you.

Back in the days when the business of a convention was held in smoke-filled rooms, delegates would vote TWICE, first to select the nominee for President and then to select his (and those days it was always “his”!) running mate.  I believe this happened at least once in the Fifties, but my memory is a bit fuzzy.  It was certainly before most states had primaries to establish the commitment of their delegates.  These days the convention is almost irrelevant.  The Presidential nominee is selected by the primaries and is allowed by the Rules committee to propose a nominee for Vice President, who then receives an up-or-down vote on the convention floor.  (Guess how the vote always goes?)  However things are done, the objective is to select a winning PAIR.  If the two contenders who have amassed the largest numbers of delegates do not work well together, the Party, as a whole, should have the ability to decide whether or not they should be running mates.

The MSM may seek their self-fulfilling prophecy with Sue’s blessing, but not so fast!

-from the Los Angeles Times:

A judge in Nevada has just ordered MSNBC to include Rep. Dennis Kucinich in Tuesday’s Democratic Party presidential debate in Las Vegas or he will cancel the forum.

Senior Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson vowed to issue an injunction halting the nationally televised debate if MSNBC failed to comply. Kucinich had filed a lawsuit seeking to be included just this morning.

The judge ruled it was a matter of fairness and Nevada voters would benefit from hearing from more than just Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama. Kucinich had been invited to participate in the 6 p.m. Pacific debate Tuesday, but that invitation was rescinded last week ... So set up a fourth podium.

Andrew Malcolm, correspondent - The Los Angeles Times

I don’t think you understand me. What we have in this case is an agent of the government ( Judge Thompson) telling the press ( NBC ) that if do not broadcast what I determine to be “fairness” then you lose your freedom to speak. This is the same as telling a newspaper that if they do not print a story to the governments liking the government will stop the presses. The government telling the press what they must report is as dangerous if not more than telling them what they can’t report.

CY

Thanks for the correction. (DNC pulling the certification - I get confused).

I’d heard from a Michigan resident that Hillary was the only one on the ballot, and I couldn’t believe it. (I even asked her if she could get a copy of it, since they’re voting today).

But in the meantime, I’d come across that other article, explaining that some of them (candidates) had pulled their names, but that Hillary and Kucinich were in fact on it, and there were a couple of others. I’m going to look for that article, although at this point, it’s academic I suppose. It’s so clearly obvious that the State might just as well not exist, in the eyes of the Dems at least, which would truly piss me off if I were a Michigan resident. Actually, it pisses me off anyway, as a US resident.

And you’re right of course. That state has been so badly dumped on that it should be thrown in with all of the other crimes against humanity. It’s just that in a fascist regime, the objective (of the regime) is to keep everything in a state of chaos and instability. It’s like, who does one even go to, to resolve any of this stuff? Activists get locked up there and everywhere else. The whole of us are being sucked up into a totalitarian fascist authoritarian machine.

And yep, I’ve been so inclined myself, to get the hell out of dodge. Seriously. And, that pisses me off too. Why should any of us have to be considering ‘escape’ from our own country, and even then, while we still can?

Kath,

Unfortunately, our system (electoral and in respect to the VP) is just as jacked-up as the rest. Ideally, it should follow the line with the votes..ie, whomever gets the most votes is Pres, next down, (number of votes) should be VP, and on.

Not here. Whomever wins the primary, will then select his or her own ‘running mate’ as VP for the general election. So, that’s how it’s decided.

If Obama wins, he could select Kucinich to run with him as VP. I don’t know that he would do that, and he doesn’t have to tell us, prior to the primary. Same thing with Hillary, who would she choose? I don’t know. It’s anybody -GUESS- and that’s what’s so jacked up.

However, at this point in time, in so far as “VP’S” go, and being a ‘valuable check on power’...have a look at our current VP, who ASSIGNED HIMSELF as the running mate for GWB 8 years ago.

HE -Richard B Cheney- the VP, is the reason we are (as a democracy) at the brink of destruction today.

Ironic, eh? No function THERE, as a valuable check on power.

It looks like you will be getting your wish, which will leave the matter to the judgment of the Nevada Supreme Court.  Nevertheless, I would not accuse Judge Thompson of CHUTZPAH.  Look at the wording in Andy’s comment at:

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20080114_kucinich_uninvited_to_msnbc_debate/#126712

Specifically, “The judge ruled it was a matter of fairness and Nevada voters would benefit from hearing from more than just Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama.”  Judge Thompson has decided to call attention to a question that most of us have been trying to ignore like a dead moose on the dining table.  That is the question of whether or not the institution of journalism (as practiced by any of the media) is a PUBLIC TRUST before it is a business.  I realize that just about everyone would regard this as old-fashioned thinking;  but that has not prevented me from pursuing it on my own blog early and often, most recently at:

http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2008/01/hate-makes-world-go-round.html

I still support Louise’s strategy of fighting the demons of capitalism with the tools of capitalism, but I cannot think of a better time for the courts to rule on the public responsibilities of journalism in a democratic society.  If Judge Thompson has started this wheel rolling, I would call it courage rather than CHUTZPAH!

grounds for a lawsuit against the media?

Best way to impact the debates.

Don’t watch them!

[Thanks to the internet you can catch anything you think you missed from a ton of available sources, including the candidates web sites]

Best way to impact the networks who serve the oligarchy, in this case MSNBC.

Change the channel!

[Independent media offers better news coverage anyway]

Best way to impact the corporations who spend millions hourly sponsoring programming on said networks.

Stop buying their products!

[And, let them know!]

And finally, the most painful hit.

Unload their stock!

[But do it now ... before the ripple causes a fall in value]

“But we are so few!”

Are we?

We are the majority!

Which is exactly why they are trying to sideline Dennis!

Best way to silence the majority. Silence their candidate!

How about a little push-back.
Democracy in action!

Without Kucinich Hillary and Obama can have a debate about which one of them loved Dr King the most.  Corporate media is determined to keep real issues out of the campaign.  If Edwards drops out his hair goes with him and they’ll have to find another major issue for the democrats.

Just before the NH primary Fox was going to hold a debate ( and did), but Ron Paul was not invited.
Because of this the NH GOP pulled their sponsorship of the debate. Will the national or Nevada democratic party do the same. I doubt it.

No the real Chutzpah is the actions of this Judge.
In essence he is saying if NBC does not air what I want to see they lose their right to broadcast. I hope NBC appeals this one.

if only because the facsists don’t want us to..

Good comments all, and they’ve brought up some additional questions for me, (especially the one by Michael Foley, about not being ‘polite’ any more, and tracking the money)

Yes, it’s good to know that Kucinich is ‘in’ now, as Tony and the update mention. It’s absolutely unconscionable that a judge had to be called in on it, or that any candidate has ever been excluded to begin with.

But, as I thought about all of the Big Money that we should be keeping track of, and connecting the appropriate dots on, I also realized that the Democratic Party Leadership itself, is just as responsible for this, (yeah, I know you’re all gonna say…well duh, Cyrena, when did you figure THAT out) and that just really pisses me off even more.

Now the DLC was perfectly willing to ‘penalize’ Michigan for having it’s primary earlier than party rules allow. As a result, some of the candidates withdrew their names from the Michigan primary ballot. (Obama was one, and I don’t know the others) Hillary, Edwards, and Kucinich are still on their ballot, for tomorrow’s primary, and maybe Gravel as well. I’d have to check it again.

Meantime, why has the party leadership not contested this a very long time ago? And, why have the OTHER candidates not contested it as well? Now Obama has rightly (in my opinion) boycotted Fox. I appreciate that. But, why haven’t he and all of the others, done the very same thing with all of the other networks, that have been playing this game?

This is just so damn disgusting. It’s like we’re already in full fascism/totalitarian mode now, even if half of us still don’t know it. Yeah, I’m glad they’ve decided to include him, but why should he have to fight for this, and go into the debate as some sort of an obvious outcast, with it being so obvious that they’ve done everything to keep him out? I hate these people. And WHO, exactly, is so damn afraid of him? Well, who is he most likely to take votes away from?

Unfortunately, I have to think Obama, because I believe that anyone still committed to voting for Hillary, is going to do that anyway. Then again, I could be wrong, because Hillary may get votes from those who simply cannot bring themselves to vote for Obama, (and there’s no point denying that, because there are many). So, BOTH of them have reason to be afraid of Dennis Kucinich OR John Edwards. So, WHY are they so damn afraid of this guy? You can’t tell me that they can’t adequately manage an effective debate with 4 candidates. Maybe 7 or 8 would dilute the time and effectiveness, (not that any of their questions are ever ‘effective’ anyway) but not 4.

I sure hope all of this has the effect of backfiring in their faces, by hitting the human instinct that dictates something to the effect of, “anything you DON’T want us to find out about is EXACTLY what we’re going to go out of our way to learn about!” WHY does he have to be kept ‘secret’ from the populace? Inquiring minds want to know.

Maybe their “decision” is payback for asking for the recount in New Hampshire.  Last minute rule changes…..sure.

Kucinich has been ruled in! That’s great news! Now maybe we will be able to watch something interesting. We are still three weeks away from Feb 5, but right now, I am thinking of voting for Kucinich. It might only be a protest vote, but at least I’ll feel good about it.

Take this behavior and extrapolate it out to the coverage of the candidates the networks DO like and what do we get? Newspapers that are even good enough to wrap fish anymore. And networks, well….just suck.

I usually do not assign my Chutzpah of the Week award as early as Monday;  but giving the award to NBC Universal is practically a no-brainer:

http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2008/01/chutzpah-contra-chutzpah.html

Note that my primary source was Andrew Malcolm’s Top of the Ticket blog for the LOS ANGELES TIMES.  Malcolm just broke the news that “Senior Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson vowed to issue an injunction halting the nationally televised debate if MSNBC failed” to restore Kucinich’s place in the debate.

I realized when I read of the about face by NBC that a big difference between now and the period of the Viet Nam war is that the old big three networks have been purchased by big defense contractors in the case of NBC (GE) and CBS (Westinghouse) and ABC by a noted right wing corporation, Disney.  Walt Disney was Joe McCarthy in cartoons or something . . .

Those are conflicts of interest, especially with NBC and CBS.  They certainly should not be able to keep the Peace candidates off the public airways through arbitrary decisions.

Congressman Kucinich chairs the House subcommittee responsible for the FCC.  I don’t understand why he is not calling for hearings to investigate these conflicts of interest to determine if their licenses should be revoked.

It’s time for Kucinich (and Edwards and Ron Paul and all the rest being left out of this discussion) to be impolite.  It’s time to start talking openly about where the money’s coming from that funds the putative front-runners.  And then to link that money to the folks that own Big Media.