You thought Anderson's ideas were radical? I just finished reading Trevor Aaronson's October 28 article about John Anderson ("Third Man"). I was one of those fortunate 100 people who actually attended the debate mentioned in the story. I had no idea that I would have the opportunity to meet this outstanding elder statesman.
He told the audience of his presidential bid and how Jimmy Carter declined to attend the first debate. He went on to talk about the Commission for Public Debates and how it was started after his presidential bid primarily to keep third parties on the sidelines. Mr. Anderson then talked about instant runoff elections and how that would benefit lesser-known candidates. This was the most important part of the speech that he gave, and there was no mention of it in Aaronson's article. I was appalled that the writer gave only one mention to Libertarian candidate Mike Badnarik. He is on the ballot in 49 states, plus Washington, D.C. The others are limited to about 35.
The media continue to give Nader coverage, yet you neglect the one third-party candidate this year who can actually win. Why is there no picture of Badnarik? You had the perfect opportunity. Were you told not to print anything about Badnarik? There has been a virtual media blackout on Badnarik even though he supports immediate withdrawal of our troops from all over the world, virtually dismantling the federal government, and abolishing the IRS.
Further, you made no mention of the conspiracy to keep the "third parties" out of the government-collaborated news!
Via the Internet
Gutless, scum-sucking free weekly: I second the comments of Thomas Costanzo. It has unfortunately been my observation, however, that most of the media outlets to whom we write this type of letter for failing to cover Libertarian candidates do not get back to us.
Apparently, these members of the press are either too cowardly to engage us in discussion about the legitimate points that we bring up, too lacking in news judgment to prioritize spending any time on the issue of the media blackout of Michael Badnarik, or too filled with ideological contempt to consider us worthy of a thoughtful response.
Volunteer, Michael Badnarik Campaign
Look deeper, bucko: As someone who voted for Brenda Snipes and who started questioning why she was appointed by Gov. Jeb Bush after the absentee ballot fiasco, I got the answers in Bob Norman's insightful article "Be Very Afraid" (October 28).
I truly am mortified, since I consider myself as someone with a great deal of political savvy. I am angry at myself for not investigating this woman before I cast my vote, particularly given the fact that I knew Bush appointed her. And now here we are with this woman controlling one of Kerry's last bastions of hope in Florida.
Thank you for shedding light on this issue.
Cuz we look deep: Why did you wait so long to publish this story? Or did thousands of missing absentee ballots prompt it? Too many people don't read or know about New Times.
West Palm Beach
He's brave: On behalf of the more than 300 members of the Boca Raton Bicycle Club, many thanks for Jeff Stratton's October 14 article on the A1A situation ("Pain in the Bike Lane").
Believing that defined lanes for pedestrians, motorists, and bicyclists benefit all users of a roadway, we continue to strive for adherence to Florida Statute 335.05 and the professional recommendations of the Florida Department of Transportation as well as federal guidelines. We all support the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Bike/Pedestrian Committee's suggested widths of these lanes.
To allow individuals or communities to choose which state statute will govern their actions is simply wrong.
Don Braverman, President
Boca Raton Bicycle Club
He's down about it: Jeff Stratton's October 14 article concerning widening A1A and the euphemistic "Save Our Seacoasts" is being shot around cyberspace. Cyclists all over the state and country are following this story with great interest.
Thanks for uncovering and reporting some of the finer issues involved -- keep it up!
And she's grillin' hot: Just wanted to thank you for doing the great story this week on the A1A issue et al. Definitely the best piece we've had in terms of depth of coverage and depth of interviews. We greatly appreciate it and hope that FDOT is reading!
Not journos, rule! Bob Norman wrote: "Bush decided to ignore the federal War Crimes Act, which is punishable by death. But impeachment will do." ("Bush's Crimes," September 30). Hey, dude, thanks from Bush for being so magnanimous about this. Any time you're wondering why the crimes of those who abuse political power always seem to go unchecked, be sure to check your gloves while playing politics with your pen.
Your otherwise good article provided a powerful set of reasons why everyone should be both for and serious about this. What disgusts me is when I see people who carefully catalog a whole range of transgressions by some entity with power -- such as a politician or a corporation -- only to reach conclusions that basically suggest it's all nothing more than a political circus.
There are victims here.
Via the Internet