Before worrying about who is allowed to view these childish
entanglements, I would wonder why we allow them to be presented as
debates. What we are presented with are simply individual cameos.
Polished, packaged little presentations that promise us in vague
terms, all that we want. These packaged shows do not allow us to see
the individual performers. We only see what they and their handlers
want us to see. It is a stage full of Wizards of Oz, hiding behind
curtains and mirrors. In short, the so called debates are just
another distraction to con Americans into believing they are being
included in the process of selecting a leader.
Another question. Are these candidates really the best our Empire can
buy? There are no strong leaders among this collection of
mealy-mouthed puppets. Oh sure, some like Trump make loud noises.
But is he really outlining a plan to set in place any of his wild
rants? And Hillary is now being sold to us as a Left of Center
Liberal. Even Bernie Sanders flaps his face in support of continuing
our eternal war on terror. How can he deliver all he has promised,
while continuing to knuckle under to the world's mightiest military
power?
I shudder to think of all the "debates" yet to be presented for our
viewing pleasure. And then we have all the state and local
meaningless mouthing to wade through.
When all the smoke has cleared, we will have a bunch of politicians
that look and act pretty much like the ones we've had for the past 50
years. The winner will be the Empire. And their Media will have been
well rewarded financially, through their pandering to their Master.
Meanwhile, we Working Class Americans will sigh a sigh of relief, and
go back to being pushed to buy the latest doojiggers.
Do we have the guts or the good sense to really cast a meaningful
vote? I mean, like turning off our TV's and Radios, and insisting on
being respected as Citizens, rather than as mindless consumers?
If we want change, we will have to be the ones to demand it. Change
bubbles up. Tyranny presses down.
Carl Jarvis
On 10/17/15, Alice Dampman Humel <alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Weren’t at least some of the Republican debacles, I mean er, ah, debates,
aired on the networks? I thought they were, and that made the fact that the
Democratic one was only available to people with cable TV. Yet another lie
handed to us was that you could stream it on line, but if you tried, you
found out you could only do that if you paid for it.
On Oct 14, 2015, at 9:23 PM, abdulah aga <abdulahhasic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Miriam
So you have to know them goal wasn't to all audience
that why debates is jus for people who pay cable TV or satellite,
because they know how many people is poor and can't pay it and they know
if all people see how they play with people life then many wouldn't watt.
-----Original Message----- From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:00 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Babble
They never debate and the rules are always set by the two national
parties.
But years ago, the debates were run by the League of Women Voters and the
debates, or whatever name you want to give them, were more open and the
rules were fairer. I would like to see them being run by a neutral party
and
I would like to see spontaneous questions from an audience that hasn't
been
hand picked, be permitted. And I'd like them to be Broadcast on PBS and
NPR
so that people who don't have the money to pay for cable TV packages,
would
have access to them. Also, advertising would be banned so perhaps they'd
be
less of a performance and more informative.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:30 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Babble
I sat through the whole thing, but, indeed, it was not really worth it
except for the entertainment value. What it is not - and this is the same
for every presidential debate I have ever seen is a debate. If any of
these
people were on a debate team they would be expelled from it. I did like
one
point that Jim Wells made. There was something about the rules such that
if
another candidate's name was mentioned that candidate got to respond.
Wells
said that since no one was mentioning him he was not getting to say much.
Indeed, it was mostly an exchange between Hillary and Bernie. In a
broader
sense that is exactly what all of them do to candidates who are not
Republicrats. Just ignore them and no one ever hears them.
On 10/14/2015 8:59 AM, Charles Krugman (Redacted sender ckrugman for
DMARC) wrote:
Carl, I don't think you missed much by not listening. How anyone can
get excited about this method of Presidential debates is beyond me.
doesn't matter whether its Republican or Democratic candidates. I
heard part of it while I was at a meeting and was underwhelmed by the
whole process. These debates are just orchestrated media shows.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 6:22 PM
To: blind-democracy
Subject: [blind-democracy] Babble
Well, I tried. So maybe there is a God, and He/She was doing His/Her
best to protect my ears and sanity from CNN. I sat patiently through
the first rush of excitement, and listening to Sheryl Crow do a ho hum
rendition of the National Anthem, and two very long commercial breaks
that were called, "Short". Then my phone began ringing. By then
Bernie began to introduce himself, my mother-in-law was frantically
wondering where her eldest daughter was. She was supposed to be at
the apartment. She'd left a note saying "Tuesday at 4:00 PM." I
said, "I'm not my sister-in-law's keeper. I'm trying to listen to
Bernie Sanders". "Who?" she asked.
"Bernie Sanders. He's supposedly debating the other Democratic
candidates."
"What do you waste time listening to that noise for?"
"it looks like I'm not listening."
Turned out the note was from last Tuesday. And I'm out of the notion
for listening to the hype.
Carl Jarvis
