[ 1 comment ] ( 4 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3.1 / 19 )In case anyone hasn't heard, Dennis Kucinich has bowed out of the presidential campaign. But you probably didn't get to see his press conference today:
http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=53211&bw=
According to a conference call this evening with the California for Kucinich group, everyone is still encouraged to vote for Dennis, since he will still be on the ballot and he is the only one representing us on the issues. We need to make our voices heard loud and clear to the Democrats still in the race that we demand withdrawal from Iraq, we demand single-payer universal healthcare, we demand a Department of Peace, and we are not going to settle for second-rate policies just because Dennis had to shift his focus to the home front.
It is absolutely despicable that special interests would channel money into Dennis's primary opponents to threaten his seat in Congress and force him out of the presidential election. Just like the main stream media's refusal to cover Dennis fairly, this proves again how terrified the establishment is of someone who is willing to speak the truth to the American people. You can fight back by contributing to his Congressional campaign at www.kucinich.us .
He is also rolling out a new organization called Integrity Now, at www.integritynow.org . So far it is just a signup form for their newsletter, but as with anything Dennis touches I know it will be a force for truth, change, and empowerment of America's true potential.
[ 1 comment ] ( 2 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 15 )San Diego for Kucinich <Steve@SanDiego4Kucinich.com> wrote:
Meet Elizabeth Kucinich
Read More...
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 5 )Dear Representative Bilbray,
I am writing because I am outraged at the failure of the FCC to protect the public's access to news and information. I just found out from an article in the Columbia Journalism Review that not only was Dennis Kucinich, a legitimate presidential candidate, excluded from the NBC debate in Nevada, but the debate was actually not broadcast in Las Vegas because of it! So the criminal actions of NBC actually blocked the people of Las Vegas from hearing from any of the candidates, with the FCC's stamp of approval! At this rate, I think the FCC is doing more harm than good! I urge you to introduce legislation as soon as possible to restore the Equal Time Rule (Section 315 of the Communications Act) to effectiveness by eliminating the exemptions for regularly scheduled newscasts, news interviews shows, documentaries, and on-the-spot news events. Also, it should be mandatory for networks to show the debates on their broadcast stations and not just on cable. Last time I checked, Free Speech wasn't something you had to pay for. Please act now to force the FCC to get all the candidates in the debates and get the debates on the broadcast stations. Otherwise what is the point of having an FCC?
Thanks!
[ 1 comment ] ( 1 view ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 2.7 / 6 )Here is the letter I sent the FCC:
Dear Mr. Berlin,
Did you see the article in the Columbia Journalism Review exposing the theft perpetrated against the people of Las Vegas by NBC on your watch? The people of Las Vegas were not allowed to see the Nevada debate broadcast on their local station because the debate broke the equal-time rule. Only those who paid for cable got to watch it on MSNBC. Not only did you fail to provide equal air time to all of the legitimate candidates, you even prevented many Las Vegas residents from seeing the debate at all! As soon as I send this email I will write an email to my Representative and my Senators asking that they either repeal the exemptions to Section 315 or abolish the FCC altogether. I hope for your sake that they choose to amend the law, although I can't say that anything would be lost by abolishing the FCC. You clearly stopped protecting the American people long ago.
Sincerely,
Beth Ehsan
San Diego, CA
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 10 )Unbelievable! You have to read this article from the Columbia Journalism Review. This is how NBC was able to finesse their way to not include Dennis:
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/dennis_the_menace.php
If you weren't outraged before, you must be now! Below is the response Carl got from the FCC. Let's all write back and tell them we've had enough!
-----Original Message-----
From: Campaignlaw <Campaignlaw@fcc.gov>
To: timeball@aol.com
Sent: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 5:12 am
Subject: RE: How much in fines fines will NBC pay the FCC to buy the presidential election? Does ABC have a counter-offer?
There is no violation of the law in a network excluding one or more candidates from a televised candidate debate. It might demonstrate basic unfairness about candidate coverage, but there is no rule violation. Although the FCC licenses broadcast stations, we have virtually no control over the content of what is broadcast. That's because the First Amendment guarantees broadcasters free speech to air pretty much whatever they want (short of obscenity or indecency). Further, the Communications Act, which established the FCC back in 1934, has a provision that specifically prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast content. As a result, the FCC cannot tell stations and networks what to air or what not to air. They can include or exclude whomever they want from debates. The question then becomes whether those excluded are entitled to equal time. The equal time law generally requires stations giving air time to one candidate to give air time to opponents, as well. However, Congress has carved out several exceptions to that rule, including candidate appearances on newscasts, most interview programs, and in debates. Consequently, a station or network could have some candidates on in those formats but not all of their opponents. So if a station chooses not to cover - or even mention - one candidate on its news, it is entitled to do so. Similarly, it can exclude whatever candidates it wants from candidate debates. The equal time rule is largely aimed at paid political advertising, such that if one candidate purchases time on the air, his opponent is entitled to buy an equal amount of time.
Sincerely,
Mark Berlin
Policy Division (political office)
Media Bureau
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 5 )I had quite a birthday weekend! On Thursday night Navid took me to dinner at Cucina Italiana, when he got home from teaching his class at UCSD.
On Friday night Carl arrived from Phoenix for the three-day weekend. We met Tess and Jose for dinner at a Thai restaurant and then saw Persepolis , an animated film by Marjane Satrapi based on her childhood in Iran. The characters and animation were charming and easy to relate to. Nonetheless, it was an intense experience, since Satrapi's family was affected by the Shah's repressive regime, the 1979 revolution, the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, and the overeager enforcement of certain facets of Islamic morality. The dialog is in French with subtitles. I definitely recommend the movie, as well as the graphic novels it was based on.
On Saturday Carl and I donned our Kucinich for President teeshirts and went to the Multicultural Festival to spread the word about Dennis. We met up with other volunteers to get flyers and encourage each other. It can be disappointing getting responses like "I don't want to hear anything," "Didn't he drop out?" or "He's a wonderful man; too bad he doesn't have a chance of winning." But we didn't give up and we gave our information to a lot of people. We even had two girls come up to us asking for Kucinich gear, so we sent them home with buttons and bumper stickers. We also took a break to eat gyros and watch African dancing.
Saturday night we joined Tess and Jose for dinner again at the Fish Market, which was exceedingly crowded--good thing we had a reservation! We came back to the house for ice cream cake.
On Sunday Carl and I drove up to Encinitas to meet some fellow Democrats at the Farmer's Market. We ended up missing the meeting but we got a good lunch and brought home organic apples and potatoes. The potatoes got mashed for dinner and one of the apples went into the coleslaw. We took a walk on the beach and saw mussels, sea anemones, and other low-tide creatures before heading back down to the Henry's in University City for more flyering. More of the Henry's customers knew about Dennis already, and a lot had already voted by absentee ballot. Again I heard people saying that they were not planning to vote for Dennis because they don't think he can win. What kind of backwards, defeatist thinking is that?! A candidate shouldn't get votes based on their probability of winning--one candidate will win by getting the most votes! And even if the person you vote for ends up losing, won't you feel better about yourself if you vote for the person you truly believe in?
I did hear a great story from a supporter. I asked him if he needed a bumper sticker and he said he still had his Kucinich bumper sticker on his car from 2004. He said he was pulled over one time for going through a red light. The police officer asked for his license and registration, ran it through the computer, then came back and told him he couldn't give him a ticket because he was a Kucinich supporter! It's good to know Dennis has fans in law enforcement.
Sunday night we watched the Packers barely lose their slot in the Super Bowl, ate dinner at home, and played Scrabble (I barely lost to Navid).
Today we had waffles for breakfast, got rained out of our nature-walking plan, went to the mall instead, came home and hung out, said goodbye to Carl, then Navid and I practiced some creative destruction on our front lawn. Hopefully the seeds we planted will fill in the big holes where we ripped out old, yellow grass. We caught the end of the South Carolina debate too. Looks like the gloves are off now. Let them tear each other down as much as they want; Dennis Kucinich still has them beat with his integrity, experience, and vision. I found it amusing when Clinton brought up campaign finance reform, considering that she and Obama are taking special interest money this election cycle (and spending more than ever) while Kucinich is actually using the public financing system. She also mentioned single-payer healthcare as one of the three ways to provide universal healthcare, then said her plan would use the other two. Never mind that those two, employers and individuals, are the ones already overburdened and crying out for relief! It astounds me that Dennis Kucinich is the only one who will acknowledge that private health insurance companies are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
I was happy to spend part of my weekend serving democracy, especially as we celebrated Martin Luther King Jr. I hope I woke some people up.
Looking ahead, Elizabeth Kucinich will be in San Diego this Thursday! I've had the good fortune to see Dennis speak more than once, but it will be great to see Elizabeth. The schedule is still up in the air but she will tentatively be on the SDSU campus at 3:00.
[ 1 comment ] ( 1 view ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 10 )Dear FCC,
As the agency responsible for regulating the TV networks, you must step in and force them to include Dennis Kucinich in their Democratic presidential debates. Dennis Kucinich is a legitimate candidate who has qualified for federal matching funds. While several other candidates have dropped out already, Kucinich has stayed in the race because he truly believes in doing whatever he can to get his message out to voters and turn this country around. Ron Paul was also barred. When television networks air a debate they make the claim, explicitly or implicitly, that they are showing all of the serious presidential candidates. If they leave any of the candidates out, their debates become a charade and no better than propaganda for the candidates they choose to feature. ABC did it in Iowa and NBC did it in New Hampshire. They have become a hindrance to the democratic process and a barrier to information. Please act now to enforce the Federal Communications Act, which requires broadcasters to "operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of issues of public importance." Require real debates, including all of the candidates.
Thank you,
Beth Ehsan
San Diego, CA
[ 1 comment ] ( 2 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 15 )There was a so-called debate between three presidential candidates tonight in Las Vegas. Yet thanks to last-minute machinations by MSNBC, no real debate was allowed to take place because Dennis Kucinich, the only one with truly contrasting views, was kept out.
Yesterday, Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson ruled that Kucinich must be included in the debate or he would issue an injunction to keep the debate from happening. "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," according to Andrew Malcolm of the Los Angeles Times.
Here's another article mentioning the court order in very misleading terms:
http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/article ... 6hdh80.txt
At the bottom is the letter I wrote them to complain.
Unfortunately MSNBC was so scared of allowing Dennis Kucinich to debate that they filed an appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court. Today the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that the District Court did not have jurisdiction to enforce the Federal Communications Act, which requires broadcasters "to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of issues of public importance," since the FCC had not enforced it. Sounds like we need to complain to the FCC! Their email is fccinfo@fcc.gov .
I am also looking for contact info for Jeremy Gaines, the MSNBC vice-president who announced their appeal.
Here is the letter I wrote to the AP reporters:
Hello Ms. Pickler and Mr. Espo,
I am writing in response to your article "Dems battle in court, debate and vote." I appreciate the fact that your story mentioned Dennis Kucinich. That in itself is unusual since he is usually ignored completely. However, I found your presentation of the story very misleading. You stated, "MSNBC, with plans to televise the debate on cable television, had decided to exclude Kucinich after his poor performances in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary." But you did not explain that MSNBC had set a specific criteria for candidates to participate in the debate, Dennis Kucinich had met that criteria, and MSNBC had already invited him, and that the decision to include only three candidates in the debate was not made until after Bill Richardson dropped out of the race. For some reason MSNBC was okay with showing 5 democratic contenders, but showing 4 people on the stage was deemed too confusing for their viewers. Perhaps a superstitious MSNBC employee is afraid of even numbers? Or is it because they, like all large corporations, are afraid of a candidate who is not beholden to corporate contributions and will not hesitate to put the American people first?
As writers for the Associated Press your stories are distributed very widely and given a lot of credibility by readers. You have an obligation to tell the full story, and not defer to corporate spin. I urge you to correct your story immediately and be more careful in the future. Please respond and let me know when your correction is issued.
Sincerely,
Beth Ehsan
San Diego, CA
kayakwhiz24@yahoo.com
[ 2 comments ] ( 8 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 3 / 25 )You should check out the documentary Why We Fight. It goes into why the Congress rubber-stamped the current war and why they contribute to the militarization of this country year after year. Did you know that the term "military-industrial complex" was used by President Eisenhower? I have only heard it from peace activists, but Eisenhower gave a farewell address in which he warned the American people in strong terms against the danger that maintaining a permanent armed force will impel us into conflicts against our better judgment. What's more, the special features reveal that Eisenhower almost called it the military-industrial-congressional complex, because the Congress is firmly settled at the trough of military spending. It's a very interesting movie.
While I'm on the subject of movies, I would also recommend An Unreasonable Man: Ralph Nader. I didn't know a lot about his early successes before watching this movie. They also had a wide variety of perspectives on his 2000 and 2004 presidential runs.
[ add comment ] | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link |
( 2.8 / 11 )Back Next
Calendar
