Comments on: Green Party Uses Right Winger To Target Jesse Jackson Jr.

By: LOL!

LOL! — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 15:15:21 +0000

The problem here is not the Green Party nor this candidate. The problem is a system that forces parties who have ballot access to use taxpayer funds and have “primaries” which allow the hijacking of their ballot lines. Candidate nomination is a party’s own business and needs to be decided by the parties and their active, card carrying members. No, I don’t mean those so-called “members” who designate themselves Green, Democrat, Republican, whatever, on a taxpayer funded voter registration form. I mean actual active members that voluntarily affiliate with a party and pay dues and are tracked by that party and its organization, not taxpayer funds. This also means separating ballot access from parties altogether.

The solution is to have equally accessible ballot access requirements for all regardless of party, or no party, affiliation. Ballot access should be predicated on an individual’s ability to meet those requirements. If an individual does not have the authorization of a party to use their label next to their name then they are simply considered and independent or can opt to have no label.

Here is a good example in practice. In the UK if you want to run for NATIONAL parliament all you have to do is find 10 eligible voters in the respective district and get their petitions. Yes, I said 10. Then you must file a 500 pound fee, which is refundable if you win 5% of the vote or more. Then you are on the ballot, thats it. If you do this by yourself without a party, you are an independent. If a party grants you authorization, then you can use their label on the ballot next to your name. Usually, candidates of parties are selected by whatever internal process the party and its members decide on, the after they are selected the party members in the local chapter provide the ten petitions and the party puts up the filing fee along with the authorization to use their label on the ballot.

Obviously, such a system prevents the kind of ballot and party hijacking seen in this case as well as encourages the building of member-driven parties that do not waste taxpayer money to track their actual members or decide their nominees. It also provides equitable and accessible ballot access requirements that encourage competitive, pluralistic democracy, as opposed to being used as weapons to keep competition off the ballot.

If Illinois were to adopt a similar system, it would be better off, as would all other states.

By: RC

RC — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:13:05 +0000

Barney, so now citizens don’t have the right to question Williams? Oh, that’s rich.

By: Congress Watcher

Congress Watcher — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:53:51 +0000

Barney, there is no religious scriptural basis for the Constitution. Show me where the right to a jury trial is in the Christian Bible. Using government to advance one religion over another is Theocracy, and that’s what Anthony Williams is doing.

By: Barney Muhammad

Barney Muhammad — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:01:48 +0000

When Green Party Candidate Elect, Anthony Williams, stands on principles historic to scripture and even more historic to the African culture concerning sexual perversity, it does not give people the right to make “homophobic” mockery. When Green Party Candidate Elect, Anthony Williams, brings the principles of scripture to the government of which it’s basic laws and constitution were founded, does not open the door to mock Him as a “Theocrat”. Now I understand the wise man who once said, “…we get the government we deserve…”

By: Green Party Chooses Homophobic Theocrat In Illinois | That’s My Congress

Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:15:55 +0000

[...] in December, we wrote of the Green Party contest in the 2nd congressional district of Illinois. Two Green Party candidates were competing for their party’s nomination to challenge [...]

By: Congress Watcher

Congress Watcher — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:45:34 +0000

And now, my concerns are validated. Anthony Williams WON the Green Party primary yesterday over Mayden, 59.6 percent to 40.4 percent – nearly 20 points, with 97 percent of the precincts reporting. Just over 200 greens showed up to vote in the district.

A homophobic takeover of the Green Party? More on this later.

By: Congress Watcher

Congress Watcher — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:36:56 +0000

Patrick, you continue to ignore my central point, which is what you’ve done to your Green Party by opening it up to people like Anthony Williams. He’s a Green Party candidate, and you can claim to reject him, but right now, he and his supporters are out there with as much right to speak for the Green Party as you. You don’t get to decide what your party stands for any more than he does.

Instead of being angry at me for pointing out that right wing Green Anthony Williams has a stronger campaign right now than Mayden, why don’t you tell me what you’re doing about it – or even what Mayden is doing about it? Right now, I see nothing but some whining about the Illinois Greens being caught with their pants down.

By: PFK

PFK — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:12:33 +0000

Congress Watcher, you keep trying to change the subject. Your article is factually incorrect, and the fact that you refuse to correct it is disturbing.

You keep bringing up Mayden… explain to me how exactly the content of his web site means we’re using Anthony Williams to “target” Jesse Jackson?

I’ll say this again: Anybody can run in the Green Party primary…Williams, Mayden. We have no control over these candidates or who is running.

It really is beside the point…you lied when you said there were “signs” that we used Williams to “target” Jesse Jackson. There are no signs, and now you are trying to look as though you actually had some kind of intelligent point.

By: Congress Watcher

Congress Watcher — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:42:50 +0000

Obtaining ballot status, by the very reasoning you’ve just used, makes the Green Party vulnerable to right wing takeover in the same way that the Democratic Party has become vulnerable to the Blue Dogs. Are you suggesting, and is the Green Party working of Illinois, to create an alternative process?

A point that you’ve failed to address is what the other candidate is doing to confront Williams – and what Green Party activists are doing on that score. I’m seeing no political content from Mayden. Can you point out where I’m missing that?

By: PFK

PFK — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:45:12 +0000

That’s a bunch of b.s., Congress Watcher. The quote I highlighted is a pretty clear assertion by you that the Green Party recruited Williams. You said that we were “signs” that the GP is “sacrificing its identity” in order to “obtain candidates”. Then you go on to talk about Williams. It’s pretty clear cut what you said and what you meant…and it’s totally incorrect.

Furthermore, you said in your last comment that the GP has purposefully created a process that allows Williams to come in. Did you not read the other comments left here? The IL election code allows anyone to run for any party, provided they get the signatures and file the paperwork correctly. We didn’t create these laws — they were created by the GOP and Dems. They — not us — set up a system where there is VERY LITTLE any party (Greens, Dems or GOP) can do to stop a candidate from running in their primary.

You clearly haven’t done your homework. Anyone who knows what they are talking about wouldn’t make such claims.