Good Example of Government trampling Liberties.

It is about money, but the internet has the fundamental method to change the entire way people communicate.

 

I don't think CNN has sponsored any, so they wouldn't necessarily have a say-so in who participates. The sponsoring organization is the one who makes that call, during the nomination process any way. I know I was reading of one group, name escapes me now, that was only going to allow the top 3 in the polls to participate.

Of course it is on CNN as to whether they cover it or not.

 

Project Mockingbird

Well now that would be a clear violation of the agency's charter.

 

Yeah, I'd say in that case CNN was a co-host and could rightly be praised or blamed for who they included. Don't think there are any hard and fast rules during the nomination process. After the national convention, that is when the rules would be stricter about who got in or was excluded.

 

Seems to be a pretty common theme!

 

Wonder why it was turned down?

 

I can hear Rudy Guiliani now, after winning the election, speaking to North Korean president Kim Jong Il...

"Mr. Il...when I was the mayor of New York City, we didn't have any nuclear weapons there. After I brought the city back from 9/11, we still didn't have any weapons. Therefore, Mr. Il, take after my record in NYC, and set your nukes free..."

RUN WHILE YOU STILL CAN, REPUBLICANS!

Boo

 

John Lennon targeted

Give Peace a Chance!

 

I was wondering the same thing. The discussion group use to be reserved for the women's bake sale items.

 

A broken record?

 

excuse me, I am obviously taking you away from your other useful commentary.

 

Yeah, well, the forum police won't let us advertise that stuff any more. :twisted:

 

Nah, just get's boring reading the exact same thing. Feel free to drone on.

 

But you brought Stinger over to this one now. It was safe for the longest time.

 

So how do we reign in agencies that are breaking the law and violating the constitution? We have three, presumably co-equal, branches of government, and a system of checks and balances. Can the executive branch do it alone? Or the legislative, or the judicial? Or is it going to take all three working together? We need to somehow persuade our elected representatives that we really do care about our constitution and all that it stands for, and if they won't stand up for it, they can be replaced. We need a chief executive who thinks the constitution is more than just a goddamned piece of paper. We need a Supreme Court that takes seriously their job of upholding the constitution. We have go a lot of work ahead of us!

 

Yeah, sorry about that, he used to stay out of the trailer park.

 

It was only a matter of time anyways.

 

Sounds like you are advocating a Constitutionalist leading the executive branch. Wonder who may fit that bill?:mrgreen: I think the answer to reigning in a lot of the agencies is to cut the head off the snake(the funding). Make them accountable for every dollar spent and judge the effectiveness. Obviously all three branches have to work together to make headway, but it is past time for the American public to send a message that we are sick and tired of what has been happening and we are not going to take it any longer.

 

We do it by getting rid of the "Representative" and do the job ourselves. We live in an age of advanced technology. We don't need them representing us anymore. Representatives were established to accommodate the wide spans of communication during a period in our history when it was necessary to travel for days just to get to DC. A "yes/no" button on your cable TV or Internet device and a group of small committees to coordinate the process will do the same job. And far less money spent with greater success in voting the voice of the people.

Technology has grown to the point where it's giving us the chance to remove the corruption and misrepresentation of our elected officials. Don't you think it's time we use it? The problem is we need to elect representatives that are willing to delete their jobs for a better America and I don’t see the millionaires we’re putting in office doing that.

 

You want to give people that have the attention span of a gnat the responsibility of making decisions by pressing a button on there remote. Even American Idol has a harder system than that. I think we have to many special interests, but at least give the current legislators a little more credit in that it takes more than 2 minutes to decide yea or nay on something. Even if you gave it to them how many people would not even turn to that channel to vote.