Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Kucinich Kept Off Texas Ballot

Posted by GottaLaff , Cliff Schecter's Blog at 5:16 AM on January 19, 2008.


My wall is now permanently dented from my head banging against it so often.
capt.277dfc119aa7441ebd81d7b57fa3f6ee.kucinichcampaignsohmd102
Kucinich

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Democracy and Elections in your
mailbox!

 

How can this be called a democracy when someone running for president isn't even on the ballot?

The Supreme Court on Friday allowed Texas to print presidential primary ballots without Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich's name.

The court refused to step into a dispute between Kucinich and the Texas Democratic Party over a loyalty oath all candidates must sign to make the ballot.

Kucinich and singer-supporter Willie Nelson objected to the party oath that a presidential candidate must "fully support" the party's eventual nominee. Kucinich crossed out the oath when he filed for a spot on the primary ballot.

A federal judge in Austin ruled against Kucinich last week. U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel ruled the state party has the right to require the oath. Kucinich and Nelson argued it violated Kucinich's First Amendment right to free speech.

My wall is now permanently dented from my head banging against it so often.

Digg!

Tagged as: texas, willie nelson, kucinich

GottaLaff is a regular blogger for Cliff Schecter's Blog


Democratic Senators: Franken Won't Be Seated with New Class
Fallout from the surreal political scandal in Illinois has now wafted into Minnesota.
Post by Sam Stein and Ryan Grim. January 6, 2009.
Update: Al Franken Declared Winner; Coleman's Options Dwindle
"Today, the Supreme Court once again affirmed the validity of the rules under which this recount was conducted."
Post by Steve Benen. January 5, 2009.
Franken Winning Vast Majority of Wrongly Rejected Absentee Ballots
Norm Coleman's lawyers tried to stop the counting of hundreds of wrongly rejected absentee ballots and now we know they had good reason.
Post by tremayne. January 3, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
At best...
Posted by: QuestionAuthority on Jan 19, 2008 6:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At best, the US is a democratic constitutional republic. At worst, it's a plutocratic oligopoly. Take your pick.

Let's face it, folks. The two parties do not and haven't cared about the welfare of the people for a long time. It's just that BushCo took the gloves off in 2000 because they knew that there was a good chance no one could stop them.

It's quite apparent that the Democrats are no different than the Republicans anymore. They are both groups of the rich elite working for their own ends. The question is what "We, the People," do about it.

Kucinich is being stopped because he refuses to dance to the same tune the rest of the candidates have been told to dance to. Why else would a Republican-dominated Supreme Court prevent him from even appearing on the ballot?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WHY?????? Posted by: luckypuck
» China Cola! Posted by: Tombo
» RE: China Cola! Posted by: Tombo
» RE: At best... Posted by: blackie4aces
» RE: At best... Posted by: racetoinfinity
YOU HAVE A CHOICE !!!!
Posted by: baked w/teflon on Jan 19, 2008 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,Coke or Pepsi,

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: YOU HAVE A CHOICE !!!! Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: YOU HAVE A CHOICE ?????? Posted by: luckypuck
» Coke or Pepsi... Posted by: trog692001
» Royal Crown Posted by: emccready
» RE: oyal Crown Posted by: 2dogarage
» RE: Royal Crown Posted by: blackie4aces
revolution
Posted by: eldoradoman1953 on Jan 19, 2008 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
time for less talking more snipering

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: revolution Posted by: FAITHCARR
» RE: revolution Posted by: 2dogarage
» RE: revolution Posted by: nochicagoboys
Wrong question, to the wrong people.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jan 19, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The supreme court declined to tell the Democrats how to run their primary.

Kucinich isn't being denied a spot on the ballot to run for president, he's been denied a spot in the Democrat's little club, by the rulers of the Democrats little clubhouse, by not playing by the Democrats little clubhouse rules.

If it helps, other parties are capable of behaving equally stupid, and more than anything, this illustrates the manner in which loyalty to one's power circle (Dem, Rep, etc) is far, far more important than one's ideas in ascending to the lofty heights of the Preznitsy.

In other words...err...'good ol' boys who knowed where they bread are buttered from need only applies'. You may consult your local Texas ballot for full details.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If The Democrats Are 'Change Agents'
Posted by: left_libertarian on Jan 19, 2008 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then I'd carefully count my money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: If The Democrats Are 'Change Agents' Posted by: QuestionAuthority
Kucinich's party
Posted by: donaxle on Jan 19, 2008 8:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't it time that Kucinich denounce the Democratic party instead of making excuses for it? He would do much better as an independent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kucinich's party Posted by: AlterEg0
TV shouldn't be allowed to control politics
Posted by: mamaferryman on Jan 19, 2008 10:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
MSNBC is trying to control politics along with the news and should be sanctioned. Everyone running for office has the right to be heard and is entitled to be in the debates. We are contrary to what they believe smart enough to elect our own president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Media Monopolies Posted by: 2dogarage
» RE: Most of the Debates have been on Cable TV Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
write in kucinich---edwards ticket
Posted by: pacto on Jan 19, 2008 10:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
my idea was to watch and see who is the most ignored by all the media and vote for them. Obama ... is backed by Oprah winfrey...media pet. hillary too...they love to hate her. Edwards sound so truthful and Kucinich are the most ignored.So I am leaning toward them, it will probably be Dennis because the media makes so much fun of his size, his wife and their commitment to each other. Its a sad day when the Media wants to manipulate so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time for Kucinich perhaps to run as independent?
Posted by: emccready on Jan 19, 2008 11:15 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After trying to bring questions to the Democratic table that the other candidates wish to avoid, I think it may be time for Kucinich to run an Independent campaign outside the Democratic party.

I am totally disgusted with the treatment he has received and now believe the Democratic party is just the left of center wing of the Republican Party.

Go Dennis Go!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've Got Your Loyalty Oath Right Here
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jan 19, 2008 11:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Loyalty oath? Good luck. Democrats as a whole won't necessarily support the party's nominee.
I am afraid that if, which seems very very likely at this point, Hillary or Obama get the nomination (especially if it is Clinton that is nominated), then many liberals and even party Democrats will be upset enough with the pick to vote third party or will write a name in.
Why is this bad? Because I personally don't want President Vomitt Romney, President Fuckabee, President Giuli-antichrist, or even President Mc-inane.
God knows there is no way I will be able to vote for Hillary in November -- But I will vote for her anyway somehow, if need be.
Jesus, I hate American politics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Loyalty Oath? Posted by: aonghus36
write in
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Jan 19, 2008 11:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
write in kucinich and edwards all the way to the white house. I have no doubts now after the way the democratic party "bosses" assholes treated courage campaign in california over censure of diane feinstein. now this. when the elections come ,write in kucinich and edwards. there is no way anybody could stop it and it would be a very very very good lesson to all the shit for brains people who think they control everything.

oh, and If you do, be sure to get a reciept for your ballot. lest it disapear in the counting stage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yeah, but... Posted by: 2dogarage
say it loud
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Jan 19, 2008 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WRITE IN! WRITE IN!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: say it loud Posted by: FAITHCARR
He should just play the game
Posted by: graffen48 on Jan 19, 2008 12:27 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what is this "Oath" supposed to be? What are they going to do if he signs it and doesnt follow it? Come, in the middle of the night and take him away??? Big deal, sign their stupid oath, and get on the ballot. Once its done, they can't force him to support anyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The emocratic Party (with no D and no conscience)
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 19, 2008 1:48 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When, after Reagan, Bush I & II and Clinton (DINO) and all of the carnage they have left behind, it's likely we will get Billary or Reagan Admiring Obama, something is wrong.

It is time for a Progressive Party and let the Blue-Ticks and DLC-Types go join the Republicans. Yes, I said it. We need to leave the Dixiecrats and make a stand.

My first voting experience was in 1980 and I do not recognize my country anymore. What's worse is that the Democrats have been enablers and participants in some of the most egregious crap pulled by the Cons and NeoCons. Not anymore.

In 2006 the voters rejected Republicanism, yet the 'leadership' has rolled over and over for BushCo. It appears that the Democratic leadership is lacking the cojones to do what needs to be done. I am tired of waiting.

Look at what they have done, leaving Russ Feingold and Dennis Kucinich to twist in the wind as they continue to fund the biggest fiscal and foreign policy catastrophe in American history. The President and his cronies thumb their noses at subpoenas and the Congress just cowers like some pimp-slapped street walker. I say lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.

" If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never realized before our interdependence on each other; that we can not merely take but we must give as well; that if we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a sacred obligation with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife.

With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.

Action in this image and to this end is feasible under the form of government which we have inherited from our ancestors. Our Constitution is so simple and practical that it is possible always to meet extraordinary needs by changes in emphasis and arrangement without loss of essential form. That is why our constitutional system has proved itself the most superbly enduring political mechanism the modern world has produced. It has met every stress of vast expansion of territory, of foreign wars, of bitter internal strife, of world relations.

It is to be hoped that the normal balance of executive and legislative authority may be wholly adequate to meet the unprecedented task before us. But it may be that an unprecedented demand and need for undelayed action may call for temporary departure from that normal balance of public procedure.

I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the midst of a stricken world may require. These measures, or such other measures as the Congress may build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall seek, within my constitutional authority, to bring to speedy adoption.

But in the event that the Congress shall fail to take one of these two courses, and in the event that the national emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me. I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis--broad Executive power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.

For the trust reposed in me I will return the courage and the devotion that befit the time. I can do no less."


Doesn't sound like the cowards in D.C., does it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is really very simple...
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Jan 19, 2008 2:45 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...we need to have a viable third party. I would like to see Kuscinich. Teddy Roosevelt did it with his Progressive Party and would it not be appropriate to resurrect it with some modifications.

If this does not happen then this country is doomed to mediocrity at best.

I know I will NOT vote for any of the "front runners" for the first time in my life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It is really very simple... Posted by: herronsmith
» It is not sad... Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal
Democracy
Posted by: fg on Jan 19, 2008 9:20 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Democracy, my ass . . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Democracy Posted by: herronsmith
THE PERSONS THAT WIELD THE POWER REALLY DO NOT LIKE MINORITIES
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Jan 19, 2008 9:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
whether they be political, social, or racial. Federal election law should not allow this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stop Supporting the Democratic Party... Pretty Simple
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Jan 20, 2008 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The democratic party should be able to have whatever restrictions or qualifications they want.

And the citizenry of this country should be smart and strong enough to realize we don't need that party.

We have a choice, say to hell with the Democrat and Republican parties or continue to vote for the lesser of 2 evils.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]