72 Comments - Leroy - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 6:21 am: I like this strategy….in retaliation for some big names signing such a de-stabilizing petition, put the word out that their signatures & addresses are invalid. The big news media outlets pick up the story, and then everyone knows what side the big names are really on. Now their careers can suffer. Of course, their signatures were valid all along… That will teach them! Pretty sweet. - bored now - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 6:32 am: poo’ l’il ole me, i thought one reason you challenged signatures was to make the other side spend time and money defending them. if that’s your strategy, who cares what signatures you challenge? otoh, the greens sure are getting some media off it. can’t say they’re getting any traction (still haven’t come across a voter who will vote green while door knocking, but) though… - Anonymous - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 7:31 am: This democrat crowd pulling still more shifty, uh, stuff? Mon Dieu!!! I don’t see how the petition signers are going to suffer by being lied about. This can only hurt Blah-Blah by showing, yet again, his people have absolutely no integrity. - Anon - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 8:43 am: Have any of you actually participated in a challenge of 39,000+ petition signatures? Reviewing that many signatures requires up to 100 volunteers per day for up to seven days. I would guess that the volunteers do their best, but they are not high level operatives who are intentionally trying to knock the party off. They are given instruction on what signatures can arguably be challenged and then they go to their computer for 2-10 hours of mind numbing signature verification. If a volunteer can’t read a persons name, printed or signed, they object because they cant verify a person’s registration status if they cant read the voters name. Same thing for street address — if it cant be read, it cant be checked. Have you ever seen the way some people sign these petitions? It looks like they write with their toes. I know Mike Kasper has been at this for some time, and my guess is that, if they decided to move forward with the challenge, he feels comfortable with the objections that have been filed. The Greens have found some irregularities that make for a good story, but I’d guess that these irregularities are infrequent enough that the Green party will not make the ballot. - Bill - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 8:55 am: Wendler is through. Maybe he can get a job at Murray State. - train111 - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 9:10 am: Anon 8:43 am I couldn’t diagree with you more. In my opinion, this whole thing is nothing more than a brazen attempt by the Dems to throw a huge amount of mud at a wall hoping that at least some of it sticks. No rhyme or reason to any of the objections if you ask me. - Schiznitz - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 9:18 am: If they held electoral board hearings in Cook County, I am sure Mike Kasper and the Dems could dictate whatever they wanted. - Southern Illinois Democrat - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 9:47 am: Those bad Dems. How dare they challenge a party that may hurt them in November. Thank goodness we have the fearless, pure as the driven snow Republicans in Illinois who would never try to keep a party off the ballot for political reaasons…oh yea, thats right they did challenge the Constitution Party. Never mind. - Squideshi - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 9:51 am: Interestingly enough, the Democrats objected to line 11 on several pages, even though there are only 10 signature lines on each petition sheet! Not only that, but they also objected to some blank lines and lines where the signatures had already been struck and blacked out. This was definately done at random–it’s frivolous. - respectful - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:08 am: I hope the Greens and their supporters remember who did them dirt. - Anon - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:35 am: Squideshi, you’ve made my point. The job to challenge these signatures in such short is so enormous that the quality control suffers. You will sometimes get volunteers objecting to blank lines, or even volunteers, being so burnt out from being in front of a computer doing the same thing hour after hour that they mark line 11 instead of line 10. Again, if Kasper filed the objection, my bet is that he is comfortable that enough of the objections are valid to get the Greens below the required 25,000. Respectful, is this your desperate attempt to find Topinka voters to fill the large void left for those conservatives who will stay at home rather than vote for the liberal Topinka? She is at 31% in the current polls — she will need to find voters somewhere, I guess. I wouldnt count on the Greens, though. If they arent on the ballot, they will either stay home or get over their grudge and vote for the Dems. - It is easy being Green - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:37 am: What are the Democrats so afraid of? I am sure that the Green Party is no threat to their highly oiled and outrageously funded political machine. How come Illinois voters are supposed to choose between two virtually indistinguishible candidates on most of the major issues while Illinois tax payers fund a democratic election in Iraq with 120 political parties represented? Illinois needs better representation politically and you cannot tell me the bar has been set to high. Green and growing! - It is easy being Green - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 11:00 am: My guess…there are some interns who are going to get fired this week. And to Anon 8:43, have you ever HELPED COLLECT 39,372 signatures in 90 days begiginning in March? It is not easy. Previous ‘new parties’ who have attempted to do this ended up paying people to circulate the petitions. The Illinois Green Party collected these signatures entirely with unpaid volunteers who donated hundreds of hours of their time. So why should we hold the circulators and signers of our petition to the highest standard possible and then cut a bunch of Kasper intern flunkies some slack? Finally, ballot access is about a healthy democracy. Retalliation for signing a petition for ballot access? How ridiculous can you get? But yes, it is real…many people refused to sign on that basis. What is this world coming to?? - Skeeter - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 11:16 am: Great. All four greens that vote will be upset. The loss for four voters may just kill the Democratic Party in Illinois. What will we do without them? - Centralia GREEN - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 11:40 am: I had to laugh outloud when I read Anon’s comments.. You make trampling Democracy sound like such hard work for a lawyer of Mike Kasper’s league. Maybe he could have used THE INTERNET to cross-reference addresses and names & such. For the money that he was paid you would have thought he wouldn’t have challenged blacked out lines, non-existent lines on the sheets & voting registrars. Dems should at least demand more for their money. This challenge is becoming a joke & GREAT publicity for the GREENS ELECT RICH WHITNEY GO GREENS GO - Centralia GREEN - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 11:55 am: Also, for Anon… Have YOU ever participated in the defense of over 39,000 PLUS signatures. There is an old Aesop’s fable about a hare running from a fox. The hare escapes & the fox is teased by his fellow foxes for not running fast enough. The fox reminds them of the differnce between running for your life & running for your dinner. Mike Kasper & his operatives, apparently cared about this process no more than to randomly mark boxes to fill a quota to “knock the Greens off the ballot”. The examples are endless & ridiculous (& some are down right funny - signatures from an annual ministers luncheon…). The DEMS are clearly running for their dinner. The Greens, on the other hand, have members who are ready, willing & able (chomping at the bit actually) to defend, on legal and logical means, these frivilous, sad & pathetic objections. Go GREENS GO - fair treatment - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:00 pm: Greens don’t remember who did them dirt. That is the whole point of being Green. We are builders not destroyers. When we are elected we will represent everyone fairly. That is why we are different from the Dems and the Repubs. - Anon - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:01 pm: Were the names mentioned challenged because of their address or because perhaps they singed another persons petition for Governor or you couldn’t read the name or address, there are lots of reasons to challange a signature, but that wouldn’t make a good story would it. My opinion is that the Greens will not make the ballot. - Diversity of Thought - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:07 pm: First, In response to the person who raised the point about the Republicans challenging the Constitution Party. Yes, the laws might be unfair, but the Constitution Party only collected 4,300 signatures while the Green Party collected 14,000 OVER the required limit of 25,000. Not that the intentions may have been good, but the Repbulicans had a legitimate reason to challenge the Constitution Party while the Dems challenge is soley for purposes of harassment. Anon, I know exactly how hard it is participating in a challenge of 39,000+ signatures. How do you think the Greens are proving the objections are BS? We’re going through all 39,000+ and verifying voter information, you know, the thing the Democrats are supposed to do when filing objections to us. If a bunch of unpaid volunteers can handle doing this simple process, why can’t a paid staff of Mike Kasper’s? The answer is that they didn’t even try. The objections are completely at random. This has never been about them thinking the Greens didn’t collect over 25,000 signatures. It’s only about wasting our time so we can’t run a real campaign. If we’re such a joke, then stop fighting us. One last point. The line by line signature defense that the Democrats are insisting on is using a dozen state workers for eight hours a day for close two weeks. That costs tax payers thousands of dollars. These employees’ time is wasted on something completely imaginary instead of doing their real work. - GREEN VOTER - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:23 pm: Anon- The lines that WE, the GREENs blacked out with black markers because WE couldn’t Pre-verify them OR the line eleven, on a 10 line sheet - those lines, didn’t sign another petition. You can’t defend the indefensible!!! I think there is a legal term for it is BAD FAITH OBJECTION!!!! I have even heard there could be sanctions for some of the legal staff if it is pushed far enough There really are ALOT of rumors & buzz at this point though - Former Dem, Votes Green now! - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:29 pm: I heard the DEMS used employees from Jesse White’s office in the past to try to get third parties off the ballot. They worked against the other party while on the clock! Rich Whitney, GREEN party governor candidate, made a SCATHING warning to them about using that practice recently in The Southern Illinoisian in this campaign. As a taxpayer I am FURIOUS that my tax dollars are being wasted like this when the state is in such awful shape!! Rod must be petrified of the GREENS, they have my vote!! - Southern Illinois Democrat - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:33 pm: Diversity Who says the Dems do not have a legit reason to challenge the petitions? Have you seen all of the evidence? These stories that are out could have come from anyone. Until the entir case is heard and decided dont claim that the Repubs claims are legitimate and the Dems are not. I didnt know that stste workers time could be wasted doing their jobs. If they were hired to review these type of petitions, then they are being oaid for what they were hired to do. Or, do you have information as to which petitions are worthy of state employees time and which are not? - GREEN&GROWING - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:35 pm: Skeeter We are EVERYWhere!!!! There are more than 4 of us!!! Greens win in a fourth the races they run, even when outspent 20 to 1! We don’t take corporate money. That appleals to voters! Pick a paper sometime, or maybe - read the capitolfaxblog - We are leading it today - We are also running a governor candidate, RICH WHITNEY The political types & eveyone else is finding it hard to ignore such a strong voice for democracy!!! GO GREENS GO!!!! - In the know - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:46 pm: Southern Illinois Democrat CLEARLY doesn’t understand the petition OR objection process. PRIOR to the objection being filed, it IS NOT the state employees job to challenge the petitions AT ALL, that is QUITE IMPROPER. I have actually seen the evidence. The republicans have nothing to do with this at all. The stories that are “out there” have come from credible media sources, using actual petitions & objection sheets as basis of their story. Southern Illinois Democrat, have YOU seen any of the evidence? You are confused. Do some research. Tell me, what do YOU think the legitimate reason would be. And Rebubs, you know if a libertarian or Constitutional Party candidate had gotten this close, you’d be doing the same! - bored now - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:52 pm: how many green candidates have run for governor since 1999? how many have won? greens are an asterisk among the electorate, and their electoral success has largely been confined to local races (like city councils). let’s not pretend that they will be *anything* but a hindrence to progressives statewide, helping only to elect radical right wingers to office. which is the point for a lot of the contributors to green campaigns. dividing the left-center electorate only helps them. that’s only a solution if you want to elect more conservatives to elective office. personally, i don’t think the conservative movement really needs your help, even if you are eager to provide it… - Green&growing - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 12:54 pm: Bored Now! pesimistic thinking like that will never stop the planet from melting!! Vote Whitney!!! solar panels on the state house!!! Go Green Go!!! - bored now - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 1:08 pm: i see. does that mean that no greens have ever run for governor? or you didn’t like the answer? or you just don’t know how irrelevant your statistic is to this conversation? - Tom Paine - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 2:19 pm: Centralia Green said: “For the money that he was paid you would have thought he wouldn’t have challenged blacked out lines, non-existent lines on the sheets & voting registrars. Dems should at least demand more for their money.” Silly Boy. You don’t understand Kasper’s scam. Kasper’s lobbying clients pay for his political activity and his litigation costs. The Dems then pay back the lobbying clients by passing their legislation. In other words, Kasper’s litigation efforts are paid for by the taxpayers. He sure is the right guy for the State Democratic Party to make its Treasurer. But, of course, these disputes are about principle not about money. - Southern Illinois Democrat - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 2:29 pm: In The Know I dont rememeber claiming I knew about the process. I was responding to The following statement by Diversity: The line by line signature defense that the Democrats are insisting on is using a dozen state workers for eight hours a day for close two weeks. That costs tax payers thousands of dollars. These employees’ time is wasted on something completely imaginary instead of doing their real work. My point was that if evidence exits that state employees are doing this then tell us about it. I agree it would be improper and that was my point. Try to read the comments and dont be so defensive. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 2:34 pm: Um, I’m pretty sure that wasn’t Mike Kasper posting at 1:13 p.m. Rich, can you remove that and prevent the impending lawsuit? This will all sort itself out pretty soon. My bet right now is that Rich Whitney will remain on the ballot. Does anybody know how many signatures the Democratic Party challenged? Frankly, I welcome Whitney into the race. He offers a scandal-free, progressive alternative to the scandal-ridden, anti-education, ant-fiscal responsibility policies of Rod Blagojevich. - M.V. - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 2:39 pm: LeRoy said: The big news media outlets pick up the story, and then everyone knows what side the big names are really on. Now their careers can suffer. Of course, their signatures were valid all along…that will teach them! Pretty sweet. ——– Hey LeRoy! You have a bright future in the Bush Administration. To Bored Now…indeed, no Green has run for governor of Illinois; this is the first time. The GP in Illinois has two elected officials in Illinois as of last year. They are for local offices, but that’s great. This year, the Illinois Greens are running more candidates throughout the state than ever before. The Illinois GP also collected more signatures for its statewide petition than ever before. As a Green, I’m delighted that we’re running a gubernatorial slate for the first time ever and I couldn’t be happier with our nominee for governor, Rich Whitney. So by my estimation, the Greens are getting more relevant, not less. - Diversity of Thought - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 3:07 pm: To Southern Illinois Democrat, The line by line signature defense (aka Binder Check) has already been scheduled for 10:30am this Wednesday. It has already been determined that there will be 12 state employees sitting with a challenger (most likely a Democratic staff person getting paid) and a defender (a Green Party volunteer NOT getting paid a dime). The 12 teams of three people sit for hours going through every single signature that was objected to. I’ll grant that the state employees are being paid for doing their jobs, which in this case is the binder check. But are there are far more productive things those people could be doing on state time? Undoubtedly. There will be hundreds of hours of lost work time. Should taxpayers be paying state employees to go through bogus objections or to do real work? As for whether I’ve seen all the evidence. All I can say at this point is YES, and have to leave it at that. Some of it is outlined in the Southern Illinoisan article above. More of it will unfold throughout the course of the week as the binder check begins. P.S. I like the fact that so many of you arguing FOR the Democrats position on this issue acknowledge that they’re ONLY doing it to harrass the Greens. I guess it’s ok when the Republicans disenfranchise black and minority voters. After all, it’s only strategy. - Christina Tobin - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 3:13 pm: I am currently working as the ballot access coordinator (BAC) for the Green Party. I was the BAC for both Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader in 2004, and the Libertarian’s State Slate ticket Skinner/Tobin in 2002. In 1998, George Ryan used state employee’s at taxpayer’s expense to keep Libertarian Jim Tobin off the ballot. In 2002, Judy Baar Topinka used state employee’s at taxpayer’s expense in an attempt to keep Skinner/Tobin off the ballot. In 2004, Michael Madigan used state employee’s to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot. See a pattern? The Democrat’s are doing it again. Their objection’s are 100% frivolous. When it comes to keeping more choice off the ballot, both the Republican and Democratic Parties are united as one. …and so the pattern continues….2006, Blagojevich’s (Legal Henchman), Michael Kasper agreed today that the Green’s will probably get on the ballot. Wasting time, wasting taxpayer’s money. He is the same Legal Henchman that Michael Madigan hired in 2004? Coincidence? Hardly. The Democrat’s & Republican’s should be ASHAMED of themselves for wasting not only our time, but also the taxpayer’s money. Shame shame REPUBLO-CRAT’S. - bored now - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 3:25 pm: mv: i took the comment, “Greens win in a fourth the races they run,” to mean nationwide, not just in illinois. hence, my question about how many green candidates have run for governor was an attempt to inject a little realism into this thread. yes, greens have had some success at the local level, but i seriously question the 1-in-4 figure. personally, i have no problem with greens running, OR with democrats playing by the existing rules and having the greens thrown off. when the greens build a strong enough organization to actually compete, no one will be able to throw them off. as for ydd, i’ve always known that his moniker was mis-named. while i, too, would welcome a “scandal-free, progressive alternative to the scandal-ridden, anti-education, ant[i]-fiscal responsibility policies” of the COMBINE, i’m dubious of yellow dog’s reasons here. i’ve not found him (yet) to be an independent voice for progressives, honest government, education or fiscal responsibility. his connections to the political establishment here just makes me sceptical. i could be wrong (i can only read what he writes). so, ydd, has madigan abandoned blagojevich? the “democratic” party of illinois is about as inert as it could possible be. i can’t figure out if the dpi has given up or just sitting on its hands… - steve schnorf - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 3:27 pm: Ms Tobin, Are you saying that state employees ON STATE TIME worked on ballot challenges to keep opponents off the ballot? If you have evidence of that, you should take it directly to the US Attorney’s office or the office of the Attorney General of Illinois. To do otherwise is to conceal the committing of a crime. Put up or shut up. - New GREEN Voter - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 3:51 pm: I’ll put up for Miss Tobin, now be nice & do some research!- Here’s an oldie, but a goodie!! http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jul2004/illi-j06.shtml Illinois Democratic officials use legislative staffers to attack third-party campaigns By Patrick Martin - 6 July 2004 In a continuation of a longstanding campaign practice of dubious legality, the Illinois state Democratic Party is using paid legislative staffers to attack the campaigns of the Socialist Equality Party, the Greens, the Libertarians and independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader. Two Democrats copied or viewed the petitions of Tom Mackaman, the SEP candidate for state representative in Illinois’s 103rd legislative district, which includes the twin cities of Champaign and Urbana. Elizabeth Brown and Brendan Hostetler are both employees of the Democratic majority in the state house of representatives. On Tuesday, June 22, Brown went to the state board of elections office in Springfield and purchased copies of the petitions filed by Nader and Mackaman. A few hours later, Hostetler visited the same office and viewed Mackaman’s petitions. Both actions took place during normal working hours (Brown at 9:09 a.m., Hostetler at 2:40 p.m.), when the two would be expected to be performing legislative duties at the state capitol. On the same day, Michael Kasper, general counsel for the Illinois Democratic Party, purchased copies of the petitions filed for the Green Party presidential and US Senate candidates. He had previously obtained the petitions of an independent presidential candidate, Melissa Vining of Wheaton, Illinois. On Monday, June 28, Geraldine Parr, treasurer and former chairman of the Democratic Party in Champaign County, filed an objection to ballot status for Tom Mackaman in the 103rd district. Another Democratic Party representative, John Tully, filed objections to statewide ballot status for Nader, Vining and the Greens. The overlapping of these actions demonstrates the coordinated nature of the Democratic Party campaign against third-party candidates. Brown collected information for the challenges against both Tom Mackaman and Nader, supplying the information to Parr and Tully respectively. Tully, in turn, received information from both Brown and Kasper, and then filed official objections against Nader and the Greens. A spokesman for state Democratic Party Chairman Michael Madigan, who is the speaker of the state House of Representatives, said the party was “happy to assist” in the challenges. Madigan’s spokesman added, with consummate cynicism, that “everyone should play by the rules and follow the law.” This statement is particularly ludicrous given the sordid record of the Illinois state Democratic Party in regard to financial corruption and ballot-rigging, including the notorious Chicago “tombstone vote,” in which long-dead citizens were recorded as having cast ballots for favored party candidates. The second Democrat to check Tom Mackaman’s petitions, Brendan Hostetler, claimed to be doing so as a “private citizen” rather than as a state or Democratic Party employee. He is a longtime associate of the incumbent Democratic state representative in the 103rd district, Naomi Jakobsson, serving as her petition checker in December 2001. He reviewed signatures filed on behalf of Jakobsson’s opponent in the March 2002 Democratic primary. This connection strongly suggests that Jakobsson had knowledge of and supported the attempt to remove her socialist opponent from the ballot. The SEP intends to make this assault on democratic rights a major issue in the fall election campaign. The Republican Party has carried out similar attacks on the democratic rights of parties, such as the Libertarian Party, which they believe will draw support from more conservative voters. Two Republican operatives checked the petitions for Tom Mackaman but did not challenge them. One of them, Bryan Hartman, is an aide to state Senate Republican leader Tom Cross, who has been very active in efforts to deny ballot status to the Libertarians. According to reports published by the Libertarian Party, dozens of state employees were mobilized by Republican legislators and the administration of George Ryan, the Republican governor from 1998 to 2002, to keep Libertarian candidates off of the ballot. Illinois Republican Chair Judy Baar Topinka, the state treasurer, is currently under federal grand jury investigation for using Treasury employees for this purpose. These exclusionary tactics are employed under conditions of what appears to be an informal agreement between the Democrats and Republicans in Illinois, in which the two parties cede control of large sections of the state legislature to one another. Republicans do not run in Chicago, and Democrats do not contest many downstate seats. All told, in half of all state legislative and state senate elections in 2004, the Republican or Democratic incumbent will have no major-party opposition. The state’s election laws are so restrictive that George W. Bush himself would be denied ballot status if the laws were enforced equally on all parties. This is so because the Republican nominating convention in New York City will take place after the deadline for the Illinois ballot. On June 30—two days after the Democrats and Republicans filed their challenges against the SEP, the Greens, Nader and the Libertarians—the two parties joined forces to pass legislation to put Bush on the ballot. The Democrats were rewarded for this favor with perks of their own, including, reportedly, the effective dismissal of as much as $1 million in fines for campaign law violations. - Can't Vote for Crooks, Must Vote WHITNEY - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 3:57 pm: Rod & his nasty corporate DEM machine make me want to take a 5 hour shower!! I know Judy & the REBUBS are no better. Instead of gambling away my children’s education, watching the planet melt, letting fat cats sell my vote to the highest bidder & wasting MY HARD EARNED TAX dollars on this silly challenge against the only party trying to improve the state of our state I think I’ll go to the Green Party website & find out HOW TO HELP!!! ILGP.ORG - DOWNSTATE - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:00 pm: Well to all other parties in Illinois I think you will find that this green party is much to do about nothing.Put on the ballot and watch them go nowhere.A few zealots trying to fire up god knows who.So let’s get back to Blago and JBT where the real money is. - Disputo - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:00 pm: Damn. I have evidence that GWB has committed war crimes (available to anyone via a simple Nexis search), but I have not notified AG AG — I guess I must be a criminal! LMAO. Surely the *real* Steve Schnorf could do a better job of intimidation than that. - It is easy being Green - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:06 pm: All I have to say is Wednesday 10:30 am Chicago SBE Bring it on Dems! You can out spend us, but you cannot out smart us. BET. - Curious non-partisan... - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:10 pm: I want to hear Mike Kasper DEFEND his objection to the signature on line eleven of a 10 line petition It should be priceless… But I’m sure these was a price, a BIG ONE!!! - Just wondering... - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:18 pm: I wonder how the “objectors” managed to pay for such high priced legal counselors to advance their altruistic pursuit of democracy? I hear Mike Kasper comes at a premium price (He did work for Bill Clinton & the DNC & Michael Madigan afterall). Aren’t the objectors average citizens, the kind who might turn up on an internet search for delinquent property taxes and such??? - Wiley E. Wolf - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:26 pm: Ms Tobin says: ‘The Democrat’s & Republican’s should be ASHAMED of themselves for wasting not only our time, but also the taxpayer’s money.’ And you, Ms. Tobin, should be ashamed of yourself for wasting apostrophes. - Tom Paine - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:43 pm: Just Wondering, see the 2:19 pm post to discover how the Dems pay for the high priced legal talent. - Tom Paine - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 4:51 pm: Steve Schnorf challenges Christina Tobin to give the Feds the evidence that shows that the campaign workers are developing ballot access challenges on State time. Even though the new ethics legislation requires that State employees keep timesheets so as to prevent such theft of State money, Christina Tobin and Cal Skinner tried to get the timesheets under the Freedom of Information Act, Madigan refused to make the disclosure, Tobin and Skinner sued and lost. The new reform legislation gives reform a bad name. - Jeff Trigg - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 5:27 pm: Steve Schnorf - I can assure you previous activity has been reported to the Feds and IL AG. We can’t force them to follow up on it or prosecute it, as evidence by them not even mentioning in their indictment and trial the 70+ George Ryan Sec. State employees working on the 1998 Libertarian challenge. (You remember your former boss George Ryan recently convicted?) Judy Baar Topinka admitted there was a federal grand jury investigation into her office’s connection with the 2002 Libertarian challenge. I’d say we’ve put up and you just don’t know what you are talking about on this one. We KNOW they are state employees, but since Michael Madigan refuses our FOIA requests for time sheets/records, only someone with subpeona power can know if they were on the clock. Unless they admit it like GRyan’s employees did. Or unless, say, a budget director notices the illegal activity and does something about it. Diversity of Thought - yes there are better things they should be doing with their time. Working to comply with the Help America Vote Act is more important since Illinois is one of the few states still not in compliance. Instead Blago and the Dems are wasting the ISBE resources on fraudulent claims. And the anon commenter trying to excuse these “mistakes” because it’s hard work, give me a break. That sounds like the excuse Blago’s admin will make with the hiring scandal. “It’s hard work to find the most qualified person so we just gave the jobs to the politically connected.” Blago’s running this state the same reckless way his lawyers are running this petition challenge. Next thing you know, Blago’s people will be randomly challenging tax returns cause it takes to long to figure out if they are accurate or not. Better to just accuse them even if it’s a false allegation. There is NO EXCUSE for the way the Democrats are challenging these petition signatures. No Excuse. It’s pathetic, desperate, and might be illegal. I should point out Mike Kasper has gotten paid by HDO in the past also. Figures. And isn’t it weird that nowhere in the ISBE database did I find payments to Kasper from the 2004 challenge of Nader? I notice the two objectors haven’t filed their committee or expenditures with the ISBE yet either. Didn’t see any in-kind donations to them from Blago or ILDEM and HCC. Campaign finance violations? When the Dems lose this challenge, and they will, they should pay back the taxpayers of Illinois and all the counties for every penny they wasted. $500,000 easily. And when the 7th Circuit finds Illinois election laws unconstitutional again, the feds should go after Madigan and the ILDEM party for racketeering. - Done with Democrats - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 6:55 pm: bored now, Do you have any idea why the Greens haven’t run a Governor before? I’ll give you a clue: third parties in Illinois need 25,000 signatures to get on the ballot. The two corporate parties need 5,000. And even when they get in excess of this ridiculous requirement, they are challenged - like with the Libertarians. I’d like to see you partake in this oppressive task. Now that the Greens have a strong organization, it is possible to gather the ludicrous amounts of signatures. Seriously, when we get 5% be prepared to see a Green governor candidate in every race. And congressional candidates. And more state assembly candidates. And County Board and so on. Eventually you’ll be bored of our success. Even though I vote Green or other 3rd party if possible, I typically vote for Democrats over Republicans (but not always.) After this harrassment and complete disrespect, I will find it difficult and nauseating to vote for anyone with a D next to their name. I ask the decent and democracy loving Democrats (I know there are many of you) to speak up against this injustice and disassociate yourself from these activities. - Former Party girl, DEM party that is - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 7:05 pm: I feel the same as done with democrats - they’ve lost my vote forever! The dems used to be the lesser of the 2 evils, now it’s a coin toss. To me they are just as evil as the dirty nasty GOP. They really showed a wicked side going after the greens like this. It makes me want to find out why they are so afraid of the green party now - Buck Flagojevich - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 7:29 pm: Skeeter, bored now, etc. There are a lot more Greens than you may want to believe. Maybe not enough to vote in a candidate into a high office in Illinois. Bottom line is the Greens will provide enough people (non Greens) with an alternative choice that will ultimately siphon off votes from either POA Rod or JBT. Many of those people would rather wretch that vote for either GRod and JBT, or they will just stay home. Now that they have a viable third choice, they can go Green, especially the ABB crowd. Why do you think Blago is trying to get rid of these people? - Squideshi - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 8:21 pm: The false assumption that you’re making is that everyone who votes Green would otherwise vote Democratic, and that’s simply not true. Many Green voters are NEW voters, who would not otherwise vote, and who would certainly not vote for Blagojevich. Many of the Greens that I know were never involved in politics before the Green Party. They simply weren’t interested in what the establishment parties were selling. You can talk all day about percentages; but the fact is that a large percentage don’t vote, and many of these are the people who are now registering to vote and going Green. Yes, some votes will come from Democrats; but that doesn’t make the Greens spoilers. Democrats don’t OWN these votes–they’re not ENTITLED to them–if they want these votes, they need to earn them. Unlike the Democratic and Republican parties, the Green Party is part of an international movement that includes Green parties and officials in elected office throughout the world. The party is still young in the United States, but the trend has been positive and steady growth. There are now hundreds of thousands of registered Greens in the United States, and more are running for office and getting elected every single day! We do have several precedents to look to. You’re forgetting that Greens have been through this process of breaking through electoral barriers before. If you want to see what the Green Party will become, just look to countries like Germany. Don’t assume that the Greens are just more liberal than the Democrats–Greens are on an entirely different axis. To many Greens, BOTH establishment parties are the parties of big money AND big enterprise. Greens believe in Community Based Economics–rather than asking who’s going to own it, we’re asking how BIG it’s going to be. We’re asking how RESPONSIVE it’s going to be. Is it going to be a lot of red tape and bureaucracy, or is it going to be responsive to the communities that it serves? You think that the executive in some corporate boardroom up in Washington cares what effect building a Starbucks will have on the character of my local community? No! Greens are calling for a diverse economy, with a balance of private and public enterprise, as well as alternative economic structures like worker-owned cooperatives. Greens are calling for the success of these to be judged not ONLY according to profit but also in accordance with things like how well they treat their workers and the benefits that they provide to the community. Rich Whitney proposes to give factory/manufacturing workers in Illinois a “first right of refusal” when runaway corporations want to leave Illinois because they’ve used up all the tax breaks. The workers would have the right to purchase the plant, run it as a cooperative; and the state would provide financing. Now THAT’s economic development and employment security! This is something that neither establishment party even comes close to approaching; so please don’t tell me that the Green Party is just some more liberal version of the Democratic Party. - Green & Glad - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 8:52 pm: Again & again Rich Whitney is on record with a fiscal plan to improve Illinois schools, put Illinoisians back to work, & respond to the global energy crisis. Rod & Judy are beyond afraid to debate him. He has common sense solutions & democratic ideas they have lost touch with. The alternative energy new deal plan that Whitney has developed is nothing less than brillant. It’s easy for voters to do a little internet research and find out that Rich Whitney & the Green Party can offer an ethical alternative to the corrupt and inept choices they are led to believe they must vote for. Illinois can led the nation in independent thought by electing a progressive, ethical statesman - Rich Whitney!! Whether the dems prevail in their charade with the Board of Elections, the voting public knows, they signed our petitions or wish they had, and are MAD that they are being objected to (AT their expense) frivilously!! Maybe they have a plan B - It is easy being Green - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 9:57 pm: If you would like to help the Green Party obtain ballot access and make this election year one worth watching, please contribute money to ilgp.org and whitneyforgov.org. Thank you for supporting a healthy and representative democracy. - steve schnorf - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:23 pm: I was thinking of proof a little more definitive than a story on a socialist website, but perhaps my standards are too high. I also understood Ms Tobin to be talking about ballot challenges in this year’s (2006) election, not 2 years ago. People throw words like corruption, illegal, unconstitutional, etc around on these web sites. Unlike the Queen in Alice, I believe words have real meaning and we can’t just assign new meanings to them on whimsy. If people have proof of that sort of illegal activity, they ought to do more than complain on this site, and post articles from socialist websites. But again, maybe I am expecting too much. - steve schnorf - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:31 pm: Oh, and Jeff, are you now implying that Patrick Fitzgerald is on the take and part of the “combine”?..Sure doesn’t look that way to me, but if he’s covering up lawbreaking discovered and reported by the Green party, I am both surprised and disapponted. Give us a break. You don’t like the law, elect some people and change it, don’t whine. Anyone want to give me the odds on the Greens getting 10% in the coming general (for those of you who don’t know the math, that is a hell of a lot more than 25,000)? - bored now - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:34 pm: dear done: i’m fully aware of the signature requirements for third parties in this state, and i have no problem with that. if you haven’t got the organization to collect that level of signatures, then you haven’t got a chance to be competitive (this is, after all, a big state) with millions of voters. if you can’t be competitive, then why waste the ink (or taxpayer dollars)? as for collecting signatures, i’ve worked in campaigns that collected a *lot* more than 25,000 signatures, so your challenge is for naught. i’m sorry that you think political organization is oppressive, but then, i’m not much for tilting at windmills. you aren’t an advocate for change if you can’t win. obviously, you’d rather be right then influential… - Squideshi - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 10:44 pm: Getting onto the ballot and into the debates makes a candidate competitive. It’s a Catch 22. - Susan Rodgers - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 11:31 pm: “i’m fully aware of the signature requirements for third parties in this state, and i have no problem with that. if you haven’t got the organization to collect that level of signatures, then you haven’t got a chance to be competitive (this is, after all, a big state) with millions of voters.” Right. However, if this is the requirement to be on the ballot and show yourself as competetive then why aren’t the requirements for the established parties just as restrictive? It’s a problem when the current parties only have to gather 5000 signatures when they have the money and primary information that the new parties with a 25,000 requirement don’t. Doesn’t sound like fair and equal elections to me. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Jul 17, 06 @ 11:42 pm: My Little Green Friends: As I said earlier, I think that having Rich Whitney on the ballot will be great for the election and great for voters. Having said that, I find all of your whining about ballot access a little…whiney. 25,000 valid signatures is not that many. The homophobes collected atleast 10 times that many, in support of a constitutional amendment that the majority of Illinoisans reject. According to the latest polls, nearly 1.5 million Illinois voters don’t want to vote for Judy or Rod. 300 volunteers collecting 25 signatures a week for six weeks would’ve nabbed more than enough signatures to put you on the ballot. I’m not arguing the rules are necessarily fair, they’re just not insurmountable. And every day you spend whining about how unfair the rules are is another day wasted, because the voters don’t care — no matter how much you think they should. Secondly, I agree with Steve Schnorf, you can accuse people of doing political work on state time all you want, I can accuse Steve Rauschenberger of being from Middle Earth, but state employees are entitled to an hour long lunch and two 15-minute breaks during the workday, so unless you have evidence that wasn’t the case here, you’re beating a dead orc. Finally, while you can blame the legislature for the steep hill you must climb to get on the ballot, you have no one but yourselves to blame for your pathetic fundraising. How do you expect to be a contender, run a statewide field operation, direct mail, volunteer recruitment, radio, faxes, etc. when you raise only $2049 — $2049 — in a six month period? And $750 of that came from your national headquarters! I know Girl Scouts who raise more money selling cookies. You could raise more than that begging for spare change at String Cheese Incident concerts or — and here’s an idea — maybe you could sell “They Both Suck - Vote Green Illinois 2006″ bumper stickers? Rich, that’s my new bid for QOTD: What should the Illinois Green Party put on their bumper stickers? - green man - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 12:01 am: The voters of Illinois are in for a pleasant suprise this election campaign–like a breath of fresh air. Green Party gubernatorial candidate Rich Whitney says that the times demand change. With the convictions and indictments of Illinois Democrats and Republicans occurring on a regular basis, he and the Green Party will get plenty of votes. Here’s what Jim Edgar was quoted as saying, “There’s not enough Republicans to elect you in the state. You need independents and, as I call them, thoughtful Democrats.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 7/16/06. Sorry, Jim, Judy can kiss most of those votes goodbye. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 12:23 am: Well Steve, the Feds only got Al Capone on tax charges didn’t they? Doesn’t mean he wasn’t guilty of ordering murders for hire during Prohibition, just that they didn’t have the evidence because budget directors and such were too chicken to turn on their gangster boss. As for the “proof” on the SEP website, I understand considering the source, but that doesn’t discount the 2 Peoria City Council members and numerous others whose signatures were accused to be invalid. You haven’t seen the originals versus the challenge, but if you did I think you would have to hold back a huge giggle like the rest of us. It was in the Southern Illinoisan also that reported this if the socialists aren’t your cup of tea. They are not my cup of tea either but Andy Spiegel, who is representing the socialists and Greens, is a Libertarian whose political ideology is further away from the Socialists as the Republicans so you can’t exactly go by the source of the article on this one. I don’ think P. Fitzgerald is on the take from the Combine, but I have to question how someone can be George Ryan’s budget director and then get appointed to a $29,000/year very, very part-time state Liquor Commission under Blagojevich while getting a millionaire pension and that NOT be combine related. Especially when that person is also advoting Ralph Matire’s 66% Income Tax Increase. You know, 40% of Illinoisans make less than $29,000/year for full-time work let alone a Blago appointment to a very, very part-time Liquor Commission? Maybe I should suggest to Topinka, Blago, and Whitney that commissioners for very, very part-time jobs shouldn’t be paid more than $9,00/year right along with the pension caps. Tell me Steve, is it worth it to Illinois tapxayers to pay for $80,000/year pensions on top of $29,000/year very, very part-time commission appointments to Liquor Commissions? bored now - “you aren’t an advocate for change if you can’t win”. Tell that to the Republican Party, Prohibition Party, Socialist Party, Bull Moose Party, Know-Nothing Party etc. The best and worst changes we have experienced in America have come about because of parties outside the two power parties. It’s not about being “competititve” it’s about being free, something most Democrats could care less about. - bored now - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 6:19 am: squideshi: getting on the ballot only makes you electable, not competitive. john anderson made it into the debates, and still did woefully. you people act like the nader example isn’t a painful scar branded on the american conscience. susan: i’m sorry that no one has told you that life isn’t fair. why should established parties that have a proven track record of winning elections have the same threshold requirements as fringe parties? that’s incredibly short-sighted. but i agree, it’s not fair to you. but it doesn’t have to be. jeff: i’m sorry you don’t understand. i’m not arguing that you shouldn’t be free to get on the ballot, i’m arguing that you should have to play by the rules, WHATEVER THEY ARE (before you begin). whining about the rules only exposes your desparation, and casts considerable doubt on your organization’s real ability to compete. say you had the numbers you claim, the whole “woe is me, life is so unfair” thing only alienates voters. to be honest, i don’t think y’all are serious at all about winning. i think you’re looking for your five percent and that’s all you care about. i think that you (the hard core) will sacrifice anything to reach that goal. the question that voters will decide is, can we risk it? is it worth giving a third party status and losing illinois’ future? there’s a lot of people in illinois who believe that we’re in six years of hell because a few voters scattered around the country (florida, new hampshire) took this risk. do you honestly think they can be fooled again? well, obviously *you* do… - Squideshi - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 7:30 am: The spoiler argument is a lie. Al From, Chair of the Democratic Leadership Council, wrote in Blueprint Magazine that Al Gore would have lost by 1% point if Nader had not run in 2000, according to the Democratic Party’s own exit polls. Why? Nader energized NEW voters, who would have not otherwise voted; and some actually voted for Gore at the last minute. George Bush beat Al Gore by only 543 votes in Florida. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, “Twelve percent of Florida Democrats (over 200,000) voted for Republican George Bush” in the 2000 election. If one percent of these Democrats had stuck with their own candidate, Al Gore would easily have won Florida and become president. In addition, half of all registered Democrats did not even bother going to the polls and voting. If you want to play the blame game, then these Democrats are to blame–not Nader. Every single third-party candidate on the ballot in 2000 received enough votes in Florida to have “cost Al Gore the election.” Reform got 17,484; Libertarian got 16,415; Natural Law got 2,281; Workers World got 1,804; Constitution got 1,371; Socialist got 622; and Socialist Workers got 562. ALL of these amounts are more than 543 votes. Besides, the spoiler argument doesn’t even apply to Illinois–Democrats control the House, Senate, and Governor’s mansion. They have the power to implement Instant Runoff Voting, and eliminate the spoiler effect, at any time; but despite having several IRV bills introduced in the General Assembly over the past few years, the Democrats won’t even let these bills come out of the Rules Committee for a debate, let alone a vote. Greens can’t be blamed for the Democrats refusal to fix a broken system. The responsibility for any so-called spoiler effect lies squarely at the feet of people like Mike Madigan, who control this. Besides, if Al Gore had put up a little bit of a fight in Florida, he would have won the election. There were plenty of african-american voters who had been illegally targeted and purged from the voting rolls, but Democrats didn’t care. When the Black Caucus challenged Bush’s election victory in January 2001, not one Democratic Senator stood up in support. Senate Democrats failed to push for an investigation of the Florida vote debacle. Don’t talk to me about the spoiler lie. I don’t want to hear about this excuse perpetuated by the Al Gore campaign. - bored now - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 7:51 am: thanks for missing the point! literacy is a wonderful thing. i can’t tell from your post if you were trying to convince me (no need), convince yourself, or because you have no real response. you might want to re-read what i wrote above. but you raise a perfectly valid point: whitney would get railroaded by the powerful interests in springfield, would have no power base from which to even oppose the wishes of the combine, and would be nothing more than a symbolic lackey. the only thing achieved by voting for whitney is that it will make some people feel better. not that there’s anything wrong with that! - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 10:24 am: “i’m arguing that you should have to play by the rules, WHATEVER THEY ARE (before you begin).” Fascinating concept. So you then believe George Bush should have played by the rules in 2004 and the Democrats shouldn’t have changed the rules just so Bush could get on the ballot. They had to pass a bill to let Bush get away with ignoring the rules before he began. And they, the Democrats, did change the rules and they’ll have to do it again in 2008. But while the Dems were ignoring and changing rules for Bush to be on the Illinois ballot, they were also kicking Nader off the ballot and holding him to the rules, which are some of the worst of any democracy in the world. So which is it, play by the rules or ignore the rules? The arbitrary Democrats don’t have any ethical leadership on that front. And it’s interesting they challenged Nader but not the Libertarians in 2004 when Nader had more sigs. Don’t even make the play by the rules argument, you look silly saying that when all evidence proves the Dems could care less about playing by the rules. Everyone I tell about our worst in the world ballot access laws don’t think it’s whining at all. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals didn’t think it was whining either. In fact, it was Democrat Lisa Madigan’s lawyer that was whining trying to argue our worst in the world ballot access laws are just fine. His whining was a thing of beauty saying independent candidates are different than third party candidates and should have harder requirements out of one side of his mouth, then saying they are the same out of the other side of his mouth. Yes, it’s classic when Democrats like you whine about having to play by the rules such as “All elections shall be free and EQUAL”. And I hate to burst your bubble but I’m not a Green and haven’t made any claims about numbers. But you raise a perfectly valid point also. Blago and Topinka would railroaded by the powerful interests in Springfield, would have no power base from which to even oppose the wishes of the combine, and would be nothing more than symblic lackeys. The only thing achieved by voting for Blago or Topinka is that it will make some people feel less worse. Sounds to me, using your logic, like they should feel better voting for Whitney instead of feeling worse voting for Blago or Topinka. Since the Governor position has no power against the combine anyway, as you suggest. Or is that only because the candidates the Ds and Rs throw up are part of the patronage job machine combine? Anyway you want to use your logic, voting for Whitney is better than voting for the combine. - steve schnorf - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 10:33 am: Jeff, Can you say “ad hominem”? By the way,I wish my pension was $80,000. So, we have you in a nut shell; irrelevant and inaccurate. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 11:09 am: Take a look around Steve, that shoe fits plenty of people very accurately. And have a little faith, keep playing your cards right and you’ll bump that pension up there. Maybe teach part-time for a few years at some state college. I bet Edgar can get you in. - Springfield Green - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 11:37 am: Bored Now, Greens are well aware that ‘life isn’t fair’ - and is in fact a great reason why so many of us have stepped up to build an alternative party to fight for social and economic justice, a sustainable environment, local decision making and grassroots democracy. But now you’re missing the point. This isn’t about life being fair, it is about our elections being fair - something each and every voter in the state of Illinois should stand up and demand. I’m an Illinois resident who is currently doing some political work in Wisconsin. Imagine how shocked I was to find that to qualify for the statewide ballot in Wisconsin (i.e. Governor, U.S. Senate) you only need 2000 signatures from ELIGIBLE voters (not registered mind you, but eligible). According to the IL Dems, such a system in Illinois would result in so many candidates that the voters would be just too confused to make a decision. But guess what, even with Wisconsin’s reasonable ballot access threshold there will be only 3 U.S. Senate candidates this year, and only 3 Governor canididates this year. If such a reasonable system works in Wisconsin, why can’t it work in Illinois? The answer is it can! And it will when the laws are changed to be made more fair and democratic - and Yes, Bored Now, our election laws should be fair and democratic and every one of us should demand that. Even you. The reason they are not is because both the Democrats and Republicans are worried about giving the voter more choice - not because it will confuse them, but because they might actually make another choice than the same two worn out masks each party is putting forward. This fight isn’t about the Greens, although the direct intent of the challenge is to prevent Greens from mounting an effective campaign challenge while they are mired in defending their rightful spot on the ballot. This fight is about the nearly 40,000 Illinois REGISTERED VOTERS who signed a petition to their government that they want another option on the ballot - these 40,000 individuals are being casually dismissed, and unjustly disenfranchised, by the IL Dems. This fight is about all of the voters in Illinois who deserve real choice in the ballot booth. It is the Greens who are currently under assault - but it is all of the voters in Illinois who suffer the result of these oppressive ballot laws. As consumers we demand 31 flavors of ice cream when we go out. We demand scores of toppings for our pizza. We demand our super box stores where we can get 51 varieties of every product imaginable. And somehow we are able to wade through those varieties and choose a product that makes sense for us individually. Why do we demand any less when it comes to the ballot box? If the Democrats and Republicans were operating a business, they would be prosecuted and broken up for anti-trust violations, unfair trade practices, collusion, manipulation of the market, co-mingling of funds and gross malfeasance. The rules aren’t the rules because they make sense, or even because its what the voters want. The rules exist to protect the undemocratic monopoly the two corporate parties have in the political system. It is time to smash that monopoly. Marc Sanson, Springfield, IL - bored now - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 2:31 pm: i completely agree that it’s time to smash the monopoly. and i’m fully aware that the green party (as it’s constituted now) not only hinders any real attempt at reform, but actually delays it. which i’m fairly certain IS THE POINT. otherwise, its adherents would be out organizing instead of here agonizing… - bored now - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 5:21 pm: i know, i know, the greens are special and should be given special treatment… just because! they don’t have to play by the rules! we call that the rule of law. why, again, should illinois risk its future because the greens think they are special??? - M.V. - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 8:58 pm: bored now, I don’t know how many examples you need to see…the Greens are the party that is playing by the rules. It’s the Democrats that are NOT playing by the rules. No matter how you slice it, objecting to a line in a petition that no one signed and in fact doesn’t even exist is shady, and if that’s good politics to you, then you’re merely an apologist. It’s the Democrats and Republican leaders of this state who change the rules to fit their purposes, as Trigg and so many others have pointed out. And who is whining? With their petty objections, Democratic leadership is whining that we shouldn’t be on the ballot. But it was the Greens went out and collected 39K signatures because that’s what we had to do. That’s a lot of hard work that could not have been accomplished by whining. And that we didn’t collect more speaks only to the limited free time that most of us volunteers have, but rest assured, the 39K is represents a small fraction of voters — namely Greens, progressives, independents — who are sick of this state being run by a guy who has a special security guard to carry around his personal grooming products. - Squideshi - Tuesday, Jul 18, 06 @ 9:45 pm: See for yourself: http://www.kiyoshimartinez.com/images/green-petition-objections.pdf - bored now - Wednesday, Jul 19, 06 @ 5:33 pm: M.V.: i don’t need to see any examples. obviously, the greens did not consult an elections lawyer or are so naive that they thought that they wouldn’t get their signatures challenged. that was incredibly stupid! whining about how politics operates in this state does not excuse your naivete. it’s not *your* job to decide what people can or cannot challenge. that wouldn’t be fair, would it? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.