Does Mainstream Media Know that 3rd Party Candidates Are Also Running for President?

But of course they do! Everybody knows that there are 3rd Party candidates running for President. But where can you learn about them? How do you know their names, their platforms and who they are? You cannot!
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

But of course they do! Everybody knows that there are 3rd Party candidates running for President. But where can you learn about them? How do you know their names, their platforms and who they are? You cannot! That is, unless you access what has been termed "the alternative media", also known as the "media voice of the People", and the "Media that is more interested in impartial reportage and truth than bias and pushing a partial agenda..."

Despite the fact that We the People own the airwaves, you would never know it. They have been so sliced and diced by the FCC among their corporate sponsors that what should be "fair and balanced" on behalf of the American People, that is, equal coverage among substantial candidates, in my view, is anything but it.

I recently interviewed George Farah, Esq., author of No Debate. When the hosting of the nationally televised Presidential debates was wrested from the hands of the League of Women Voters and effectively 'taken' by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), the People's interest was marginalized and the two major parties, Democrat and Republican, shaped the debates as they wanted to among themselves. This is an obvious conflict of interest and serious problem, that apparently, no one in any position of power, wants to acknowledge or recognize.

As a result, the two parties agree between themselves who will moderate it, how long it will last, what the format will be, what the topics will or will not be, what the questions can and cannot be, and even what colors are the backdrop behind the podiums. The parties agree to control any follow-up questions the moderator can ask. Seemingly, the only thing they don't control is how many breaths the moderator can take, or sometimes gasps, in between questions.

In sum, Clinton agreed to have Ross Perot, in a stunning departure from company procedure, in the debate in 1992 because he got his way by scheduling one of the debates against Bush Sr. to fall right at the same time of one of the games of the World Series. The level of manipulation of time, context and manipulation is gone into in depth both in my radio interview with George Farah as well as in his book.

Amy Goodman of Democracy Now, Gary Null of Progressive Radio Network, myself on A Better World Radio & TV, and a good handful of other, so-called alternative media outlets, have given voice to at least a few of the 3rd Party Presidential candidates. I would say that not only is it simply Democratic to do so, our supposed form of government, but the refreshing intelligence which one experiences, in my opinion, is strong enough that, if it were made known widely to the Public, the Democratic, nor the Republican candidate, would stand little chance of winning. They are rendered not viable, not because of their platforms, which serve the People of the United States a lot more fully than the two dominating parties, but because the near total media blackout of them makes it near impossible for People to know of them and get familiar with their intelligence, experience and platforms.

The good news is that C-Span televised Larry King as the moderator of a 3rd Party National Debate last week on Tuesday, October 23 evening, which included Rocky Anderson, former two-term Mayor of Salt Lake City, Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party, Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, the Libertarian Party and Vergil Goode of the Constitutional Party.

This blackout of the values of Democracy is unethical but commonplace in a society that allows for this kind of bias to rule instead of impartiality.

Interestingly, 3rd Party candidates don't speak of each other's tax returns but of life-and-death matters facing our nation and world, of high-risk matters, of issues of the rule of law, of major ethical issues.

They speak of ending wars, ending private security contracts, closing military bases around the world that are launching pads for killing people with a gloss of nobility attached to it, which gobble up our tax dollars and cause hostility against Americans worldwide.

They speak of providing single-payer or Medicaid-for-All healthcare programs, significantly boosting education and dropping the exorbitant interest rates on student loans, regulating the banking industry, building a green, sustainable economy, looking at domestic surveillance, the legislation that is severely unconstitutional limiting freedom of speech, building the collapsing domestic infrastructure, and subjects that actually serve Americans, not simply corporate interests. They address the surveillance State the U.S. has become, the militarization of police forces across the country and in short, the corporate takeover of our Constitution and government. They speak about Global Warming, protection of the environment, and moving into renewable energy sources. They speak about life and the protection of life, all life, the real nitty-gritty matters, subject that matter to us all and to our Earth. They speak about getting money out of politics, campaign finance reform, repealing Citizens vs. United, term limits to one longer term, moratorium on foreclosures, reinstating Glass-Steagall, curbing the out-of-control banking system, and legalizing pot, with its medicinal benefits and its ability to provide economic strength to many states across the country.

One of the subjects these candidates address is how the Media shape and narrow the conversation about candidates for President. So important is it that these voices be heard on our national airwaves and national media.

The 3rd party candidates talk about issues that matter to People, not a bunch of in-the-box rhetoric.

As Chris Hedges states so well, a vote for either Republican or Democrat is still a vote for a Corporate State.

When we begin to reach beyond our neurosis and preoccupation with fear and control, we can actually create a life-affirming society, with generative institutions and government that serve the People instead of itself. We can change the whole conversation, but to do this, we need access to the fuller array of voices in the political and Presidential arena, which are closed out due to, as said, the pathological yearning for power and control at the expense of Democracy, freedom and peer ship.

Popular in the Community


What's Hot