🚀 go-pugleaf

a lifeform pontificated:

: FYI: Alan Keyes, along with about 50 supporters, is camped out on the
: front lawn of WSB TV (W. Peachtree & Peachtree), as of 10:00pm.

: He's planning on being there through the night. In case you haven't heard,
: the management at We Suck and Blither has decided to exclude Dr. Keyes from
: the debate tomorrow, which includes Dole, Buchanan, Alexander, and Forbes.

Aw, poor babies, apparently they are only choosing to invite candidates
with a hope in hell.

Pity party for Alan.

Oh, is he planning another hunger strike?

--
Charlie Smith			"The city was a sewer.  A
gt6978b@prism.gatech.edu	 cesspool.  A smut-tiled bath-
				 room with hot and cold running
				 crime..."

Oz, the Great and Terrible, (gt6978b@acmex.gatech.edu) wrote:
: Aw, poor babies, apparently they are only choosing to invite candidates
: with a hope in hell.

I'm glad to see that the tyranical rule of the media in this city has
your full and devoted support to stamping out the 1st ammendment.

The man has _not_ dropped out of the race, and should not be ignored
simply because he isn't in the lead. How about we just go ask OIT to
cancel everything you post, on the grounds that no one will be interested
in hearing it?

--
guyjr@ulc199.residence.gatech.edu
a.k.a., Guy Elden, Jr.

a lifeform ranted:
: Oz, the Great and Terrible, (gt6978b@acmex.gatech.edu) wrote:
: : Aw, poor babies, apparently they are only choosing to invite candidates
: : with a hope in hell.

: I'm glad to see that the tyranical rule of the media in this city has
: your full and devoted support to stamping out the 1st ammendment.

: The man has _not_ dropped out of the race, and should not be ignored
: simply because he isn't in the lead. 

I'm quite fond of the first amendment.  Mr. Keyes shopuld learn that he
lacks suppord for a reason.

  How about we just go ask OIT to
: cancel everything you post, on the grounds that no one will be interested
: in hearing it?

Well, that's one way to handle criticism.  Of course, most people prefer
to post a rebuttle.  But, if you're not up to that, I guess editing the
opposition works well too.

--
Charlie Smith			"The city was a sewer.  A
gt6978b@prism.gatech.edu	 cesspool.  A smut-tiled bath-
				 room with hot and cold running
				 crime..."

guyjr@ulc199.residence.gatech.edu (a lifeform) wrote:

>
>FYI: Alan Keyes, along with about 50 supporters, is camped out on the
>front lawn of WSB TV (W. Peachtree & Peachtree), as of 10:00pm.
>
>He's planning on being there through the night. In case you haven't heard,
>the management at We Suck and Blither has decided to exclude Dr. Keyes from

	WHO?? is Alan Keyes?  Never heard of him!


Regards,

          Dutch

**Sooner or later we have to abandon all hope for a better yesterday.**

flydutch@mindspring.com ("Dutch" in Atlanta, GA USA) writes:


>	WHO?? is Alan Keyes?  Never heard of him!


Duuuuhhhhhh!  This is why we are stuck with idiots like Klinton.  When
those with internet access don't know who is running for president (no
lack of alteratives to WSB and their liberal brethren), let alone local
races, we are going to continue with the status quo.  Take time out from
reading alt.mental.masterbation and turn your web browser to "presidential
candidates."  It doesn't matter if you agree with Dr. Keyes message or
not, all sides have a right to be heard.  The same goes for the general
election in the fall.  All parties having a presidential candidate should
be allowed to debate, not just Democrats & Republicans.  It is your
responsibility to know who is running for president.  Of course, if you
have a problem taking responsibilty for your life and want to be told what
think, you won't like Alan Keyes.
-- 
We all know that the law is good, if it used in the right way.  We also
understand that it wasn't used to control people who pleased God, but to
control law breakers, criminals, godless people and sinners. It is for
wicked and evil people, and for murderers . . .  1 Timothy 1:8-9 CEV

Oz, the Great and Terrible, (gt6978b@acmex.gatech.edu) wrote:
: a lifeform pontificated:

: : FYI: Alan Keyes, along with about 50 supporters, is camped out on the
: : front lawn of WSB TV (W. Peachtree & Peachtree), as of 10:00pm.

: : He's planning on being there through the night. In case you haven't heard,
: : the management at We Suck and Blither has decided to exclude Dr. Keyes from
: : the debate tomorrow, which includes Dole, Buchanan, Alexander, and Forbes.

: Aw, poor babies, apparently they are only choosing to invite candidates
: with a hope in hell.

: Pity party for Alan.

: Oh, is he planning another hunger strike?

I  can't believe you would say that!  Just because  he's not leading 
right now, he still has a right to debate the  other candidates.  How
would you like it if somebody ignored you just because your ideas are not 
in the mainstream?  I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate the establishment
infringing on your right to be heard.

Sandra

--
Sandra Marina Sirtis - From the cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation
Young Republicans have no heart, but old Demons have no brain.
Georgia Tech, United Federation of Planets, NCC-1701D
Hailing Frequency : gt6954a@prism.gatech.edu

Oz, the Great and Terrible, (gt6978b@acmex.gatech.edu) wrote:
: a lifeform ranted:

: I'm quite fond of the first amendment.  Mr. Keyes shopuld learn that he
: lacks suppord for a reason.

Well, even if you're correct, he *still* has the right to be a presidential
candidate and have his voice heard.

:   How about we just go ask OIT to
: : cancel everything you post, on the grounds that no one will be interested
: : in hearing it?

: Well, that's one way to handle criticism.  Of course, most people prefer
: to post a rebuttle.  But, if you're not up to that, I guess editing the
: opposition works well too.

No, that's a valid argument.  Most people prefer to post a response to an
argument, not just complain about it.

Sandra

--
Sandra Marina Sirtis - From the cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation
Young Republicans have no heart, but old Demons have no brain.
Georgia Tech, United Federation of Planets, NCC-1701D
Hailing Frequency : gt6954a@prism.gatech.edu

In article <4hcnus$aj2@catapult.gatech.edu>,
Sandra Marina Stoenescu <gt6954a@acmex.gatech.edu> wrote:
>Well, even if you're correct, he *still* has the right to be a presidential
>candidate and have his voice heard.

So's everyone over the age of 35. Where do you draw the line? 

-F
-- 
  .   J.D. Forinash:      geek, speed demon, sysadmin, Vogon poet, DNRC member
 /o\  You're not cleared for that.             <IMG SRC = "stardestroyer.asc">
'---` http://www.cc.gatech.edu/people/home/foxtrot       foxtrot@cc.gatech.edu
The more you learn, the better your luck gets.                             <*>

In article <4hcnus$aj2@catapult.gatech.edu> gt6954a@acmex.gatech.edu (Sandra Marina Stoenescu) writes:
>Oz, the Great and Terrible, (gt6978b@acmex.gatech.edu) wrote:
>: a lifeform ranted:
>
>: I'm quite fond of the first amendment.  Mr. Keyes shopuld learn that he
>: lacks suppord for a reason.
>
>Well, even if you're correct, he *still* has the right to be a presidential
>candidate and have his voice heard.

This is in no way a first amendment issue.  Nobody is
keeping Mr. Keyes from publishing his views.  The first
amendment implies that the government has no power to
keep him from spreading his message.  It in now way
implies that anyone in particular must help him do so,
and that means that WSB has no obligation to permit him
to participate in a debate that they have sponsored.

On the other hand, much as I disagree with Mr. Keyes,
and find him a distateful individual, I do believe that
democracy would demand meaningful, _inclusive_ political
debates.  

As far as it being unreasonable to exclude candidates
from debates, I'd like to remind everyone of the exclusion
in 1992 of the Libertarians candidates from the presidential
debates -- when the Libs were indeed on the ballot in
every single state - just as Perot and the two big party
candidates were.

It would seem that we are in great need of not a 
"bipartisan" debate committe, but a non-partisan
group which sponsors debates, with non-partisan rules
for the debates themselves as well as reasonable and
consistent rules for participation.  The current
system is absurd.

(Though, of course, remember that this stage of the
game is still primaries, not the actual general elections,
and thus much of it will be controlled by the parties
involved, and reasonably - the party's selection of a
candidate is an intra-party matter.)

--D
-- 
dmeyers@panix.com

"Any technology distinguishable from magic
 is insufficiently advanced."

In <4hflij$1od@mordred.gatech.edu> michael@fuzzy.gatech.edu (Michael Mealling) writes:

#In article <4hfanf$p3c@catapult.gatech.edu>,
#Oz, the Great and Terrible, <gt6978b@acmey.gatech.edu> wrote:
#>
#>Alan Keyes has not gotten double digit support in any state.  Ergo, he has
#>no chance of winning the nomination.  While he is more more than welcome
#>to try and convince the country that his views are correct, WSB is not
#>obligated to pay for his soapbox.  If they choose only to invite the top X
#>candidates, that is their right.

#Whoever says that Keyes has a 'right' to force WSB to allow him in is
#an idiot. What everyone is saying is that WSB was wrong for not allowing
#him in. You can be wrong and still be within your rights....

Until you get the wrong side of the FCC for violating your broadcast license...

James

#-MM

#-- 
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#<HR><A HREF="http://www.gatech.edu/michael.html">
#<ADDRESS>Michael Mealling</ADDRESS>
#<ADDRESS>michael.mealling@oit.gatech.edu</ADDRESS></A>

I dunno about all this philosophy and arid discussions of legal matters. I
just know that WSB would not have had Jesse Jackson arrested. The only
reason Mr. Keyes got into trouble was the WSB station management
determined that he is not a legitimate candidate for president. After all
the man IS insane-he is black and is running on the Republican ticket! (My
sarcasm should be evident, but if it isn't, yes I was being highly
sarcastic.)

All I know is that WSB station management felt that they had to keep a
black man, a candidate for president who deserves to be heard, out on the
street. I'm surprised that anyone still watches their news. I DON'T think
it is "to their credit" that they covered the protest. I only wish I could
have showed up to make my stand in person.

This whole incident shows that no one is safe from racism (even a
presidential candidate), and that WSB placed themselves in a morally
repugnant position. I flamed them today-I found their email address on
their suck-y Web page. It's got their fax number too. Maybe I will just
fax them an angry letter.

I find the WSB station management to be disgusting sick people who don't
treat African-Americans with the respect they deserve as human beings. At
least they treat SOME blacks with respect. Where is Monica's backbone?

To me America has always stood for fairness, treating people with respect,
allowing all the viewpoints to be heard (even if we find them to be
disgusting and obscene). When large media outlets determine who can run
for president, our liberties are threatened in a way which is completely
different from the CDA.

These self-appointed guardians of the First Amendment are running scared
of the Internet. There is finally a medium they can't control. Long live
free speech! Web pages for the masses! Self-publication for the little
people!

-- 
Dale Smith
Mindspring Tech Support (there's nothing like reading Usenet in your sleep...)
Join "EvangeList," Guy Kawasaki's (un)official Apple listserver of
good news about Apple, Macintosh, and third-party developers. To
subscribe to EvangeList, send an email to
listproc@solutions.apple.com and include in the body of the message the text: Subscribe Macway <Your Name>

In article <4hll5m$7sd@acmez.gatech.edu>, gt6506b@prism.gatech.edu
(Winston Ho) wrote:

  :3.  They may have had the right, but they were extremely rude to invite
  :than uninvite Keyes to the debate.

As I understand it, Keyes was invited to a different debate. The GOP tried
to hold a debate, couldn't get any of the leading candidates to addend,
and then cancelled theirs and became a co-sponsor of WSB's.

  :4.  Keyes has the right to suit WSB.  I would too.

Anyone has the right to sue anyone. That doesn't mean he has a case.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The original seven words were, fuvg, cvff, shpx, phag, pbpxfhpxre, 
zbgureshpxre, and gvgf. Those are the ones that will curve your spine, 
grow hair on your hands and (laughter) maybe, even bring us, God help 
us, peace without honor (laughter)  um, and a bourbon."
                                                        --George Carlin
                   From FCC V. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978) 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * atticus@mindspring.com * ROT-13
http://www.mindspring.com/~atticus/

Jane Spaulding <xenakis@pop3.cris.com> wrote:
>This is getting out of hand, folks.  Maybe those of us who would have
>liked to see Richard Lugar have a chance to speak should organize and
>protest.  After all, he was not invited either.

He doesn't have any delegates.  Keyes does.

(Ironically, though, Gramm has more delegates than Keyes, and he isn't even
in the race.)

	Jeff

I've read this  entire thread and offer my opinion that the 
decision to keep Alan Keyes from the debate was a combination of several 
ideas from this thread.
	Most people would agree that the media is distinctly liberal and 
almost always support the Democrats( Who can they support in the Rep. 
primary?).  Being liberal, they want Clintax to win this fall and Dem's. 
to regain complete control in the future.  
	Furthermore, it is fairly accepted that Democrats gain much of 
there support from fringe groups; As opposed to catering to the average 
free thinking American... ie. they promise there support to several 
groups with very differing agenda's/values.  By doing so, they gain a 
sizeable portion of the vote.  The problem is that if they lose too much 
support in any one of the groups(especially one of the larger ones) they 
don't get enough votes to win.  
	In steps Alan Keyes, a BLACK CONSERVATIVE with MORALS who just 
happens to be a REPUBLICAN.  They do not want him to be heard.  Just the 
knowledge of his existence is enough to garner the support of many black 
voters, whom the Democrats have always counted on in the elections(This 
also had a lot to do with the reason they wouldn't leave Clarence 
Thomas alone).  If Mr. Keyes gets enough publicity, the Dems. may end up 
debating against him in the future, thereby offending more of there 
constuencies.  From what I have seen and heard, Mr. Keyes had/has the 
potential of support from black, christian, and conservative voters.  
Without the support of one of the main constituency groups, Clintax 
wouldn't have a chance come November( I'd like to think he doesn't have 
a chance anyway, but if I thought that, I'd be wrong).  
	I personally think it's more political than anything.  If 
there's any racism involved, it's on the part of the liberals who claim 
to support minorities.