It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Badnarik to protest in New York during The Republican Convention

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 04:52 PM
link   
This just in from the Badnarik Campaign......




NEW YORK -- While some political groups continue to 'negotiate' with the City of New York for permits to protest next week's Republican National Convention, Libertarians -- including a presidential candidate -- are preparing to open up a whole new can of worms in the Big Apple.

"If you ask for permission to protest, you deserve to be told no," says Manhattan Libertarian Party chair Jim Lesczynski. "The First Amendment guarantees our right to peaceably assemble -- and we're going to do so" on Central Park's Great Lawn at noon on August 29th. The city has denied permits to groups which have applied for permission to gather in the park, attempting to move them to more distant, and less visible, locations.

"There's an old saying -- it's easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission," said Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate, during a campaign strategy teleconference. "I've got permission. By definition, where I am standing is a free speech zone. We don't need permission to protest, but George W. Bush needs forgiveness for his mistakes. We're gathering to offer him that forgiveness ... if he's willing to ask us for it."

Among those mistakes, says Badnarik, 50, of Austin, Texas, are the war in Iraq, the PATRIOT ACT -- and the whole concept of "free speech zones" for protesters. "America itself -- the whole country -- is a 'free speech zone,'" he says. "That's what the First Amendment means, or it means nothing. We're going to find out which in Central Park. We're going to find out whether President Bush and Mayor Bloomberg believe in America or not."

While Badnarik is considered a long shot for the presidency, polling shows him determining the election's outcome in a number of "battleground" states, including closely watched New Mexico, where his support stands at 5%.

The Manhattan LP has a longstanding reputation in New York and in the Libertarian Party as an "in your face" activist group. Previous Manhattan LP initiatives have included "Guns for Tots," in which Libertarians handed out toy guns to the city's schoolchildren to protest a proposed ban, and the "Great Cigarette Giveaway," which provided New Yorkers with free smokes to counter the city's massive 2002 cigarette tax increase.

Badnarik is also expected to debate Green Party presidential nominee David Cobb during his visit to the city. The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, with more than 600 Libertarians serving in elected and appointed office at the local, state and federal levels.


Give'em Hell Mike


[edit on 27-8-2004 by Amuk]




posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
The more you talk about him Amuk, the more interested I become.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jonna
The more you talk about him Amuk, the more interested I become.



Thats what I am here for.....LOL

BTW

Beat you to it Truelies



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   
[edit on 10/2/2004 by esther]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Unfourtunately it seems like Badnarik is to the media what kryptonite is to Superman.

I'm afraid that the media will stay out of Central Park now just so they don't give Badnarik air time.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
Unfourtunately it seems like Badnarik is to the media what kryptonite is to Superman.

I'm afraid that the media will stay out of Central Park now just so they don't give Badnarik air time.



This is looking like the only way he WILL get air time

You know its kinda strange that they will give Nader who is on the ballot in just a handful of states all kinds of free press but Badnarik who is ALREADY on most ballots and expected to get one EVERY STATES ballot is avoided like the clap.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:12 PM
link   
BUMP


I dont see how the Media will be ABLE to ignore this



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   
[edit on 10/2/2004 by esther]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by esther
What is he garnering in the polls? 5-10%? I thought that's what I read but it seems like the response I have been seeing here, he should have higher numbers.

Maybe it's just the multitude of Baddie-fans here, which is skewing my perspective as far as the real number of votes he could pull in?


esther.

.



The trouble is that some media news shows wont even allow you to mention his name.

The 5-10% is almost through word of mouth



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Well, some polls have him winning by a landslide (such as the poll on this website usavotingpoll.com... ) but that is mainly because Badnarik has a great presense on the internet with all of the blogs and such.

Realistically, he is polling at about 3% nationwide from what I recall, and 5% in New Mexico. Those numbers should rise as his campaign should be getting more recognition as the election draws nearer.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Usually what I do is add up Bush and Kerry's poll numbers, take out the margon of error and the remainder is Badnarik.

Really frags me that they show Bush v. Kerry. Then they show Bush v. Kerry v. Nader.

Good thing is everyone grips about Nader taking Kerry votes away. What they don't notice is the conservative votes going to Badnarik. Hell, if they could figure that out, you'd probably see him all over the 24/7 news.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
Unfourtunately it seems like Badnarik is to the media what kryptonite is to Superman.:



Weird, I heard that saying on am radio yesterday. Did you by any chance call in and say that??
It went like this...
The liberals is to facts what kryptonite is to superman... funny you just said the same thing... weird...

And Amuk:

I let you have this one good buddy...
I can't be a hog all the time



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
Unfourtunately it seems like Badnarik is to the media what kryptonite is to Superman.


Michael Badnarik was mentioned on The O'Reilly Factor last night! Of course, FOX wasn't happy... Check this thread out:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's actually a pretty funny story



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueLies

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
Unfourtunately it seems like Badnarik is to the media what kryptonite is to Superman.:



Weird, I heard that saying on am radio yesterday. Did you by any chance call in and say that??
It went like this...
The liberals is to facts what kryptonite is to superman... funny you just said the same thing... weird...

And Amuk:

I let you have this one good buddy...
I can't be a hog all the time


No I didn't call it in, but now that you mention it I heard it the other day too. I think it was on Hannity. I must have subconsciously used it.

Good line either way.

Edit: Ooh, Ooh... I remember it now...
Facts are to a liberal what kyrptonite is to Superman.
My .02... It takes the fight completely out of them.


[edit on 8/27/2004 by phreak_of_nature]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   
God I love it......LOL



The Republicans are terrified that someone will tell the American people what true freedom is all about



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I wish more people would realize that it is ok to have a 3rd choice and would give it a chance rather than fear they are wasting their vote. If enough people would take the leap then their vote wouldn't be "wasted" and a LP candidate might actually win.

18 months ago I had made up my mind to vote for Bush, but a lot has happened since then to change my mind. On the other hand, there is no way on Earth I would ever vote for John Kerry. I couldn't live with my conscience if I did that. Come to think of it, I cannot vote for either Bush or Kerry in good conscience as I feel like Bush is tightening the noose bit by bit and we are becoming a police state, while Kerry would go to the UN for their permission on every little thing. The choice seems to be: Police state, or loss of severeignty? Both are equally evil, and one or the other will happen if they are elected.

The Patriot Act is a major sticking point with me, but I try to keep in mind that PA2 was proposed by Tom Daschle (D). I know that it is a done deal regardless of who is elected, unless Bardnik wins. Ralph Nader is a joke, so I don't consider him a viable candidate.

After losing much sleep and agonizing for the last 6 months, I finally came to the decision that I will vote Libertarian this time around, and I can do that with a clear conscience. When all hell breaks loose I can know that *I* did not make the choice to do that by voting for them.

A lot of the talking heads say that their entire decision on who to vote for is strictly by who they think will keep us safer. I think the answer is neither one. They both are equally dangerous, but in different ways. Bush and Kerry both scare me to death, and the next 4 years (or 8 depending on who wins) will be a complete nightmare. I feel a moral obligation not to contribute to this, but still feel like I need to exercise my right to vote.

If you don't know much about the Libertarian platform, check it out. Some of the ideas I don't agree with, but much of them go along with the principles the US was founded on and defend those principles.



posted on Aug, 28 2004 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Well, one reason Nader is given so much airtime, unlike Badnarik, is because he is funded by the republicans. Yep, Nader's main funding is from the GOP. Badnarik, on the other hand, gets no funding from the Dems. Maybe because the Dems realize it is wrong for the GOP to do it to them, and they won't play the same games as the GOP.

Also, Nader can be on tv all he wants, but Bush&Co came out awhile ago and told the major news networks that if they discuss any third party people/issues they will be punished with media blackouts, IRS sicked on them, FCC sicked on them, fines, so forth. So say Fox News had Badnarik on. After that interview FN would be banned from having any coverage of the RNC, the IRS would run an audit costing FN millons in lawyers and other bs payment one does with that, and if they have anything that might be bad, FCC fines them. Like how Howard Stern goes against Bush, talks about salad tossing, fined. Oprah doesn't go against Bush, talks about slad tossing, nothing happens.



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 11:25 AM
link   
James the Lesser

Do you have anything to back this up?

Any links?

I do not doubt what you say but links would help



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join