Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Jill Stein addressed many issues in 2012; “viable” candidates didn’t!! 2016??

For those of you who don't already know, there were several candidates that did a good job, if not an excellent job addressing many issues in 2012; however they received little or no attention from the commercial media. The ones that were presented as "viable" were ones that collected an enormous amount of money from corporations and didn't challenge the lack of coverage on many important issues by the traditional commercial media.

Both Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson did a far better job addressing the issues than either of the two candidates the received the nomination for the two parties that the commercial media are willing to recognize. Several other candidates that I'm less inclined to agree with also did a far better job addressing the issues, and they don't blindly support the corporate agenda. None of the other candidates for the nomination during the primaries were seriously interested in addressing many of the most important issues either.

In a democracy elected officials try to carry out the will of the people and respond to legitimate grievances.

In a democracy we need a system that enables the public to choose their candidates at the grass roots level so that they can eliminate people who don't respond to the will of the people.

In our system the candidates that we have to choose from are decided by the political establishment and those that control the commercial media. For the most part they have already attempted to anoint Hilary Clinton as the presumptive Democratic nominee, although they have allowed for some consideration for a small handful of candidates like Joe Biden and, perhaps Elizabeth Warren. On the Republican side they've provided a list of candidates that have all had a history of going along with the establishment and none of them on either side have risen through the grass roots.

Elizabeth Warren has been presented to a large portion of the public as a grass roots candidate; however as I explained in a series of posts about her starting with "How sincere is Elizabeth Warren?" and most recently, "Elizabeth Warren is a charismatic propagandist not Messiah," she was part of the establishment long before she became part of Obama's administration in his first term. The media has presented her as a consumer advocate, based primarily on standing up to banks on a handful of issues and a charismatic speech; but she has represented numerous other corporate interests and she is following the same pattern of behavior that other establishment candidates like Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton have.

Ironically in her book “The Two-Income Trap,” she criticized Hilary Clinton for taking a strong stand against banking interests then caving as soon as she needed to collect money for her Senate campaign and she wound up voting for corporate interests at the expense of the public.

Now that Elizabeth Warren is senator she has demonstrated that she also represents the corporations in numerous ways although it might take a close look to get past the propaganda that is repeated over and over again about her.

As long as the majority of the public continues to accept the propaganda given to them by the commercial media then there is no reason to believe the political establishment won't continue to ignore the will of the people, while giving them no more than a token amount of consideration to keep them complacent. Once again there are close to, if not more than, two hundred candidates for the president, most of whom the commercial media will completely ignore.

Now Jill Stein's name will be added to this list.

In Hong Kong they know that as long as they can only chose from the candidates approved by the Chinese government then it won't be a real democracy.

That puts them one big step ahead of the United states.

If the corporate media is allowed to tell us which candidates we can choose from then there is little or no reason for them to try to respond to the will of the people, despite all the propaganda about this being a democracy.

This won't be a democracy until grass roots candidates that actually do address the issues and respond to the public, not just their campaign contributors have a chance of getting elected.

That won't happen if members of the public don't even try to support real grass roots candidates.

Bloomberg News has taken one of the first steps to portray Jill Stein as a fringe candidate that doesn't have a chance with their low profile announcement of her candidacy, Green Party's Jill Stein Exploring Run for the White House 02/06/2015, which doesn't address any issues; instead it highlights the low poll numbers without telling anyone that the main reason for her low numbers isn't that the public doesn't support her; it is because the media refuses to cover anyone that doesn't support their agenda, effectively rigging the election.

Even the announcement of one of her supporters doesn't seem to indicate much hope for her being elected, Jill Stein will run for president again 02/06/2015; however, although there is no doubt that she has an enormous amount of obstacles it would be foolish to rule her out this early especially when doing so would mean that it will be business as usual with no sincere chance of real "Hope and change" outside of empty campaign slogans that are guaranteed to be broken one the election is over.

Supporting this candidate or any other one alone won't be enough to get real change but it can be part of a major efforts if it includes other efforts. One of the most important issues that should be done is to make some efforts to make some major and real election reform, that includes changes like Instant Run-Off Elections and, or Proportionate Representation and a system where all candidates respond to questions from the public like the ones provided by Project Vote Smart. Candidates that refuse to answer the best questionnaires, whether it is from Project Vote Smart or some other organization should be boycotted.

Project Vote Smart started out with the best questionnaire that I have seen to date; unfortunately they have deteriorated in the past fifteen years but they still do better than anyone else that I know of. I'll be getting back to restoring that or replacing them in a later post.

It will also be necessary for more protest movements to get their views across, whether it is the Occupy Wall Street movement, 350.Org, Black Lives matter or many other ones that continue coming up although the media doesn't cover the vast majority of them.

More reliance on alternative media outlets that actually do cover most of the news, protest movements and legitimate candidates that don't cater almost exclusively to corporate interests will also be necessary. These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America and if citizens want real news that isn't designed to maximize profits for those 6 oligarchies then they have to start looking for alternative outlets at least until reform begins and the government stops protecting the consolidated media corporations without requiring them to at least try to do a good job.

If small media outlets actually try to do a good job they should get as much if not more protection than the oligarchies who are involved in epidemic amounts of fraud and propaganda.

I'm not calling for censorship of the oligarchies.

I'm calling for an end to the censorship that is already happening against the vast majority of the public by putting them at a disadvantage against the oligarchies.

And even if Jill Stein or other Green Parties don't have a chance, which I'm not willing to concede, it could go a long way to improving the chances of local candidates giving future alternative candidates a better chance in the future. As I indicated previously The media is ignoring winning Grass Roots candidates, mostly at the local level for now; however there have been several grass roots candidates like Jesse Ventura and Bernie Sanders that have also won.

As "Brains and Eggs" points out the majority wants alternatives; but the media isn't providing them. So the public should seek them out on their own or at least try if they want any chance at a real democracy not a corporate plutocracy thinly disguised as democracy.

Jill Stein in Denton and Houston later this month 02/16/2015

.... A majority of U.S. adults, 58%, say a third U.S. political party is needed because the Republican and Democratic parties "do such a poor job" representing the American people. These views are little changed from last year's high. Since 2007, a majority has typically called for a third party.

The results are based on Gallup's Sept. 4-7 (2014) Governance poll. The first time the question was asked in 2003, a majority of Americans believed the two major parties were adequately representing the U.S. public, which is the only time this has been the case. Since 2007, a majority has said a third party is needed, with two exceptions occurring in the fall of the 2008 and 2012 presidential election years. Complete article

If more people woke up then we could really elect our own candidates instead of those preselected by either the Chinese Communist Party or the American corporate media.

As I said Jill Stein addressed many issues in 2012; “viable” candidates presented by the commercial media didn’t; and she has provided a lot of that coverage on her web site, including an enormous amount from her 2012 campaign and her Project Vote Smart questionnaire which she did fill out unlike the so called “viable” candidates. The following are some of my past blogs on the subject from 2012 which covers an enormous amount of her positions and includes information from several independent organizations in additions to Project Vote Smart. It may not be the best coverage but it is far better than what the commercial media provides and it includes links to many of the debates that were ignored by the commercial media.

A closer look at Jill Stein This includes an in depth look at many of her positions which are presumably the same, from both her web pages and at least three independent organizations as well as my take on her.

Jill Stein wins nomination without corporate control

Jill Stein supports Constitution unlike Romney and Obama!! This includes additional information about how violations in war, immigration policy and the death penalty are threatening our national security and increasing crime more than they protect it.

Jill Stein “Fire Wall Street!!!”

Occupy the Commission on Presidential Debates!!

Censored at debates: Jill Stein, sincere candidates, issues Includes links to several debates for both the 2012 election and one for the 2002 election for Massachusetts governor where she also ran against Romney.

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama agree, a lot!

Could alternative debates be a game changer? Includes links to several debates the 2012 election some may be redundant but some may not be listed in previous post and there are probably more elsewhere.

Final debates then vote for Jill Stein …..or Jesus? Santa? I didn't make this up; there really was a write in campaign for Jesus; and a real person that is actually named "Santa" did run for president; however at the last minute he dropped out and endorsed Jill Stein.

Why Build the Green Party? - Jill Stein on Reality Asserts Itself (1/3) 02/15/2015

Jill Stein on the issues in 2012

Jill Stein news or history from 2011 to 2013

No comments:

Post a Comment