Andrew Warner

You complaints would have merit if Bob Fritrakis had an agenda for Ohio and was actually supported by the "non-corporate, active" citizens.

But because he has to rely primarily on out-of-state money and is offering nothing other than an anti-Bush platform, I for one don't think democracy is being harmed by excluding a candidate from a debate on the economy when he's proposed absolutely no platform on those issues.

Well Modern Esquire, let's pretend like you are correct and Bob has no plans in regard to the economy.

That still leaves one question...

Why is Bill Peirce, an ECONOMIST, being excluded from the debate!?!

Now let's go back into the real world where you are wrong... If you have paid attention to the campaign, not exclusively website content, Bob has discussed economics.

Off the top of my head, I have heard Fitrakis discuss the living wage (and also the proposed minimum wage raise), I've heard him discuss investing in alternative energy and supporting the businesses that wish to do so (and not the earth destroying coal industry that Ted Strickland loves), and of course universal health care (which is an economic initiative).

These, along with other ideas, would actually get heard if Fitrakis were allowed in the debate.

It's quite difficult to present an alternative platform when they don't allow you to do so in debate form.

And what does money have to do with debate Modern Esquire? We get it already! Ted Strickland is the biggest sell-out and yes he does have the most corporate financial support (yes, more than Blackwell). That doesn't mean his ideas are worth hearing and Blackwell's, Peirce's, and Fitrakis' aren't.

And I didn't say he had support from non-corporate, active citizens. He IS one!

Yet again you dodge the issue. For all your vaunted praise of the grassroots and democratic movement, you blindfully ignore the fact that the progressive community in Ohio is not supporting Bob Fritrakis. That's not just my opinion, but fact. Fritrakis is being bankrolled by out-of-state interests, and if you don't think that affects his campaign, just look at how much he rallies against Bush rather than the actual issues being faced here in Ohio or his actual opponents.

How else do you explain that the "non-corporate" active citizenry in Ohio is not flocking to his message to even give him a check or promote his candidacy? For all your shrill and baseless criticism of Strickland, you miss the fact that many of his donations are from private individual activitsts like myself and labor unions from within the State, far more than Fritrakis. Perhaps you think the labor movement shouldn't be allowed to contribute to campaigns, either.

And don't blame me because Bob Fritrakis doesn't take advantage of the Internet to spread his own platform better, especially on his own website. All those things you mentioned are things that Strickland has already proposed. You may be against coal, but I would think as a Green you would promote policies which encourage the use of green technologies to make coal production and use more environmentally friendly instead of sticking your head in the sand and declaring coal, like nuclear power, to be off-limits as a domestic energy source.

Debates are HIGHLY overrated, but they're to help undecided voters decide who they want to be as their next Governor. Neither Pierce or Fritrakis are going to be Ohio's next governor, and it's not because of some corporate conspiracy which could easily be overcome. It's because the people don't support them.

Third-party candidates have been able to break through the corporate wall and win and be effective campaigns. Neither Fritrakis or Pierce have run those type of campaigns.

What issue am I dodging and what are you babbling about?

Your defense for exlcuding candidates is that they don't have enough money? Such a system will make sure that candidates who actually represent the poor, not just pretend to represent the poor like the Democratic Party, will never be heard.

You claim that Bob is just repeating Strickland's ideas? PLEASE point me in the direction to see where Strickland has stood up for single-payer health care, a LIVING wage (not merely a slight increase), and environmental/economic development that does not completely destroy our state beyond repair (ie not being in the pocket of the coal industry).

Please tell me where Ted Strickland has advocated publicly funded elections (probably difficult to do because that might eliminate his corporate advantage).

The rest of your argument is merely a chicken/argument (as the Dean of Cincinnati might say). Is the campaign not raking in donations from individuals because he is being excluded from the media or is he not covered by the media because he is not raking in donations?

Let me put it simply... It's hard to make friends in high school if you are locked in a locker, right? It is difficult to find campaign contribution if the media refuses to acknowledge your candidacy.

Now you pretend to be a legal mind and use fine print to make your points, but when it comes down to supporting the exclusion of candidates from a debate you just shrug your shoulders and say "I don't realy want to hear what they're going to say because they're not going to win anyway."

modern excrement, you may be an activist, but you aren't progressive. Coal and nuclear will never be clean and therefore will always be subsidized. Strickland, like Blackwell will continue to support the corporate welfare system and reward his corporate paymasters.

"Debates are HIGHLY overrated" You're basically saying democracy is overated.

"Fritrakis is being bankrolled by out-of-state interests" Certainly Strickland and Blackwell are getting more money from out of state so what are you talking about.

As for the unions, they're are controlled by the democratic party. The should be able to contribute, but they should be smart enough not to contibute to the party that gave us NAFTA and GATT. That was Clinton/Gore that gave us such wonderful legislation that sent all the jobs overseas and lowered standards for workers and the environment.

It was an independent named Ross Perot that warned us about this. He had pretty good numbers because he was in the debates and could afford media coverage. After that the corporate duoploy decided they needed to keep tighter control of the debates or they might have the emergence of some real challenges.

There is a conspiracy to keep these candidates out. The local debate will be run by the Chamber of Commerce. What right do they have to decide who our candidates are?

The most important part of the electoral process is to have a deep discussion about the direction of our state.

Didn't just last week Bob Fritrakis walk away from an event because he didn't want to have to hear what Ken Blackwell had to say?

And now we should feel sorry for him that the feeling is mutual?

The issue you are dodging is that Strickland is being supported financially and by volunteer labor by thousands of "non-corporate" Ohioans who want to get him elected Governor. Strickland has created outreach and created grassroots support throughout Ohio. Citizens making phone calls to other voters, knocking on their neighbors' doors, doing lit drops, parades, etc., because they support Ted Strickland. And there's nothing corporate about that.

Strickland supported the Clinton Administration's single-payer health care initiative in 1994, and lost his seat over it, and he still supports universal health care today.

It looks like most, if not all, of the debates are sponsored by media organizations, not the Chamber of Commerce. If anonymous knew anything about Ted Strickland, they would know that Strickland voted against NAFTA and other "free" trade agreements as being disasterous to our small businesses and economy.

Andrew, you can't deny that I HAVE LISTENED to what Fritrakis has to say, and I've revealed that he has changed his story and promised things he acknowledges he can never legally delivered. Hell, I'm the only blogger besides you that has given him any attention whatsoever!

I find it rather ironic that you blow off my criticism that Fritrakis has no financial grassroot support here in Ohio as evidenced by his largely out-of-state financial backing here, but then post a story to try to raise funds for him here in Ohio.

My standard for excluding Fritrakis is because he's failed to show that he has absolutely any significant support within the State of Ohio and has utterly failed to articulate an actual agenda for the governorship. His campaign has been more about campaigning against Bush than proposing anything to actually improve Ohio, let alone help the poor in Ohio.

Sorry, but the fact is that debates aren't just academic exercises. They're to help people decide who the next Governor of Ohio should be. With Fritrakis having no grassroots support, not even appearing as a blip in the polls, it's hard to say that he's being kept out in some Nader-esque conspiracy. At least Nader could point to signs that he was actually a threat to win the election.

If you outlaw coal and nuclear power, where's the money going to come from to help the poor pay for the resulting skyrocketing costs of energy (especially since all electricity in Ohio is generated by either coal or nuclear power?)

Frankly, debates are overrated because most people don't watch them, they tend to be more about sound bites, and most people who DO watch them already had their minds made up to begin with. They tend to be more about joint pep rallies than actual debates. Fritrakis' inclusion would hardly change that.

And being permitted in the debates hardly guarantees a candidate the exposure necessary to get significant support from the voters. In 1998, all the third-party candidates were included in the gubernatorial debates. And yet, the most any of the third-party candidates got in that election was 3% of the vote.

I doubt Fritrakis' exclusion from the debates, therefore, is the reason behind his disasterous showing in the polls this November.

Modern Esquire,

You've lost all sense of focus, but I will try to repond to all of your nonsense.

I have never dodged the issue in regards to Ted Strickland having support, he obviously does. I have never said anything that would indicate otherwise. He, like Bob, should be allowed to participate in the debates. Is he the corporations darling still? Yes.

"Strickland supported the Clinton Administration's single-payer health care initiative in 1994, and lost his seat over it, and he still supports universal health care today."

So he lost his seat over a principle than quickly sold out his position? Let me show you his plan for the state of Ohio:

"While government alone can’t solve these problems, Ted Strickland believes the State of Ohio can play an important role in strengthening our healthcare system and reducing the cost of health care coverage. A Strickland-Fisher Administration will substantially increase the number of Ohioans covered by establishing a free-market clearinghouse for private health insurance plans where all uninsured Ohioans—regardless of income—can purchase coverage at reasonable prices."

A free-market clearing house for private health insurance plans? In other words, he lost his seat over the belief that everyone should receive health care and now he supports only "more" people having health care and funnelling more business to private health insurance. Way to go Ted! Who needs principle when you can get elected?

"I find it rather ironic that you blow off my criticism that Fritrakis has no financial grassroot support here in Ohio as evidenced by his largely out-of-state financial backing here, but then post a story to try to raise funds for him here in Ohio. "

You're absolutely right, I am crazy. I am the only blogger who has ever tried to get people to donate to a political candidate. By the way, my blog is available for reading to people of any state, not just Ohioans.

"If you outlaw coal and nuclear power, where's the money going to come from to help the poor pay for the resulting skyrocketing costs of energy (especially since all electricity in Ohio is generated by either coal or nuclear power?)"

By investing in alternative energies that aren't destructive perhaps? Solar? Wind? Etc? There's plenty out there. Houses can be built with solar roofs that free people from utility bills forever -- maybe that would be discussed if we didn't have the coal poster boy as the champion of "progressive" issues in Ohio.

"Sorry, but the fact is that debates aren't just academic exercises. They're to help people decide who the next Governor of Ohio should be. With Fritrakis having no grassroots support, not even appearing as a blip in the polls, it's hard to say that he's being kept out in some Nader-esque conspiracy. At least Nader could point to signs that he was actually a threat to win the election."

No grassroots support? Fitrakis collected over 10,000 signatures with ZERO money. Do the efforts of all the volunteers for an opposing campaign mean nothing? Did these signatures just appear out of nowhere with no grassroots support? Why do you expect me to herald the group that champions Strickland while you shit on the efforts of those who help Fitrakis?

If you are exlcuding candidates for lack of support, how is this determined? Must a candidate have X amount of dollars? Must he have X amount of volunteers? Or is it just at the discretion of the Modern Esquire and a straw poll of 400 people?

Modern Esquire,

Can you please explain where you got the notion that the Clinton administration supported universal healthcare and a single-payer plan?

Remember, in 1993 and 1994 both branches of Congress were controlled by Democrats. Why didn't the single-payer initiative, which you claim Clinton proposed, pass?

Again: The Gingrich clan didn't take over till 1995. History revisionism or false information?

Modern Excrement, I never said anything about Strickland's position on NAFTA and GATT. I said the labor unions are stupid for supporting the party that gave us NAFTA and GATT. That was your beloved glory days of Clinton/Bore, when your corporate party had the majority.

The debate in Columbus was run by the Chamber of Commerce and so is the one in Cincy and those are corporate media outlets your talking about, aren't they?

You haven't revealed anything other than the fact that you're a moron.

"Sorry, but the fact is that debates aren't just academic exercises. They're to help people decide who the next Governor of Ohio should be."
No shit Sherlock. That's why all the candidates should be in them. We don't care about your standards and Nader was already famous and had the best platform, that's why he was a threat and had to be shut out.

Third parties have always brought the important issues to the forefront, then the major parties steal them. Keep listening to Fitrakis and you'll learn something. You should stop making stuff up about him. We don't make stuff up about Strickland, we just talk about his crappy positions.

That's right Chad! The Dems just talk about things like that, they never deliver.