Recently in New York Politics Category

Was it the Return of Jason that brought IPR down the morning after ? Is the Last Free Voice that of Elf Ninos Dad ? Poor Third Party Watch, does anyone care anymore ? How did George do up in New Hampshire ? What about Bob ? In NY, the LPNY collected more signatures than votes it seems. Our numbers doubled from 2004 though, with a 47% increase from the Gubernatorial effort two years ago. That's my best Wes Benedict spin on the results . . .

Sorry if I chuckle the next day . . . but it ain't about winning folks . . . it's about the fight.

Generalissimo Paterson petitioned the weary Congressfolk with confessions of destitute coffers in Albany. Citing the voluminous needs of the State, namely myriads of infrastructure needs left neglected for the crime of a well fed and bloated bureaucracy. Nary admitting that the fall of the heralded place in American culture, namely Wall St., has left him and his fellow placated beings (legislators) flat footed and holding a potential 47 billion dollar debt in the next 5 years. What first was only 20, now was more than double.

As this cycle of the American electoral farce closes, a colleague writes;

Governor David Patterson appeared to taking steps toward bringing a little bit of fiscal sanity to New York State. Recognizing that the meltdown of the financial markets, combined with troubles in the housing market, employment, and all other aspects of the economy, he has emphasized a need for some belt tightening budget cuts in state agencies and plans to have the state legislature take action to assist in this effort during a special session later in November.

Commendable first steps, governor, but likely to fail as a result of your own missteps. Your call this past week along with that of Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey for federal assistance will serve as an incentive for the legislature to do ---- nothing.

In this day and age its baffling as to why a major print media outlet would choose to endorse one parties candidate over another. One must presume that the either/or nature of the ancient electoral process holds sway over stifling editors and publishers to the extent that it feels compelled to endorse despite the risk of alienating the other half of their market. Why not stay neutral and endorse no one ?
Of course those of us on the third party sideline simply shake our fists and suffer indignation as not only our candidates are ignored, but our ideas too. The Capital District's own Times Union recently endorsed Barack Obama over John McCain. While it is hardly surprising, the premise of the article is that Obama is right on the issues. Of course it would be hard to believe that a candidate who was even better on the issues and not one of the two heavies would ever get any consideration.

Here's a sample of the reasoning behind the decision and some counterpoints (after the jump).

Given the volume of drivel about to hit the airwaves and Internets in the next three weeks, here's some of what I've picked up over the last few days from regular people . . .

One employee describes her employer's passion for Obama, but admits her own family will be writing in Ron Paul. No argument about the waste and possible Libertarian alternative works.

An otherwise Republican neighbor says the McCain support of the bailout pushed him over the edge. He's voting Barr now.

The teacher as sister-in-law says Obama's the man. Stickers and pins coming. The little retarded guy down the street who loves the Yankees says the country's not ready for a black man. Otherwise decent but redneck fellows feel the same. Sorry, but it's true. I actually deign to talk with these folks on occasion.

Another neighbor says Barr or Nader. Doesn't care, hates the two main parties. Destroying the country. I couldn't agree more and both of us suspect little will change. I mention that I'd rather have him vote for Barr as the state chair . . .

Ok, one more time . . . another comment as Entry.

Mr. B in DC,

The purpose of a third party is not necessarily to win elections. As many who would drive certain processes and results within said third party, often use this mantra to bludgeon opponents and coax sympathizers, it becomes simply a pernicious catch phrase that hampers other 'purposes' of political parties and frequently wastes vital resources for the real effort.

Given the horrible context (single plurality districts, gerrymandered districts, media blackouts, ballot access restrictions, either/or -lesser of two evil psychology) of two hyper bloated and dominant parties, it is a small miracle that other parties even form and attempt to influence the process.

Once again a comment response turned into good enough for an 'Entry' . . .
It's about all I have left in me any more this cycle.

Some commenters on the CapCon want politicians and staff writers to know that it is not inherently a two party system. Systematic ballot access restrictions, arcane rules, gerrymandering and a single plurality method have kept competition enough at bay in the polity that it certainly seems like historic inevitability will once again reward the red and blue gangs. Vote Third Party.

There are many independents and unaffiliated voters in the 20th CD. Because the two dominate, wholly different ideas and policy measures are never considered. The fact that two trust funded party insider elites manage to dominate with a message of nationalized energy and almost no discussion about a foreign policy that reeks of Empire, is simply a reflection of a vapid intellect and the status quo of power. Vote Third Party.

This initially started as a response to a local blog comment and morphed into something else . . . .

Issues ? Issues ?

1. An undeclared war transformed into an unending occupation. Parties responsible ? Republican & Democrat.

2. A ten trillion dollar debt. Blame ? The spineless pleasers of both the Red & Blue.

3. Rights v. Entitlements - Once the people realize they can vote themselves the largess of others labor and property there is no limit to expectation and demand. Both sides of the aisle partake in this theft while abrogating the basic principles of private property, habeus corpus and due process.

4. The Nanny State - First it was the seat belt law, then trans-fats, cell phones while driving or walking and every other do good cause that can be conceived of. The cameras are starting to roll on every major street corner and we've always been at war with Oceania . . .

Somewhere in the bowels of the Albany bureaucrazy a satisfied group of middling freedom apostates will be studying the effect of violent video games on children. This little piece of legislation was recently signed by New York Governor David Paterson. Given Mr. Paterson's age and visual disability I highly doubt that he has any understanding of modern video gaming. He doesn't seem the type to spend an all nighter with buddies at a LAN party or partake in the satisfying camaraderie of online companions exploring the World of Warcraft.

As someone who has been associated with computer games their entire life, I would submit that the violence of the state is a far greater risk to our society than the blips that pass before us on screens that elicit nothing more than an active imagination. A video game has never bombed a third world village, never drafted young people for war and never imposed a tax with the threat of violence behind it. As these folks gather in plush conference rooms with hot coffee and fresh pastries, starting a flurry of communication to tackle the project and justify their violence based salaries, I would submit that labels and other niceties that will be affixed to these products will do nothing to slake the thirst of gamers for their free market products that hurt no one but the occasional bruised sensibility that passes for the modern, effete progressive on a high horse.

One wonders if the old 3D Caveman game applies in this situation. After all that was a world premised on survival and violence. And while it probably has passed it's life cycle in the real gaming world, it's still violence right ? I'm guessing the anti-statist world of Grand Theft Auto is the target of this inquisition, not the cuddly metro cavemen we see on the Geico commercials.

Your candidate sucks. Know this as you prepare your guy for the fight in the fall. He just flipped on FISA & matching funds. Things he pledged not to do. Who hired Samantha Power and James Johnson ? I have have to say as an atheist, it was hard to get worked up about the Reverend Wright. But I do get worked up about ballot access and candidate debates. Both of which your guy fails miserably about. Now I hear he's going to help bail out multi-millionaire Hillary Clinton and her campaign debt, go figure.

I suppose touchy feely crap is the stuff of modern political candidacies, but I'm still waiting for substance. I know the average Ivy League graduate in the MSM thinks those memoirs and books we're the right stuff, but I'm unswayed. But is he the darling that the disgruntled right would have us believe ? As far as I'm concerned the dude can't even bowl, so Harvard degrees in law are meaningless. There simply is no evidence that he understands economics or anything beyond the typical pandering of a main party politician. My vote for President of the United States has always been 'wasted', as a denizen of New York, there's no doubt that my fellow collectivist citizens and their deep desire to hope and have change will carry the day for Obama. This is just a quick protest note to goad your idealism a bit.