Comments on: ACLU Asks for Rehearing in New Mexico Libertarian Ballot Access Case http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/21/aclu-asks-for-rehearing-in-new-mexico-libertarian-ballot-access-case/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:13:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=9921 By: Michal http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/21/aclu-asks-for-rehearing-in-new-mexico-libertarian-ballot-access-case/comment-page-1/#comment-173199 Michal Sun, 02 Dec 2007 17:56:54 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/21/aclu-asks-for-rehearing-in-new-mexico-libertarian-ballot-access-case/#comment-173199 We're very gratified to see that the ACLU and Libertarian Party is further pursuing this issue and as a party are cosidering weighing in, as this ridiculously discriminatory law greatly affects our candidate's abilities to participate in the electoral process as well. This of course, is entirely the intent of the law, as designed by the Republican and Democratic parties who are responsible for its creation. The technicality referred to in the 10th circuit ruling is one issue, but Demo Rep points to the greater problem. Why should separate NOT be equal? Why should minor parties be effectively repressed by laws MADE BY major parties that have the effect of keeping alternative platforms and voices from participating in our "democracy." (I question whether we still have this, and can probably speak for many in the party on this comfortably). Look at what Nader and Romanelli are experiencing, documented well by Mr. Winger on this site. Then also look at what the Russian system is experiencing vis a vis minor parties, also documented here (thank you Mr. Winger) The similarities are striking and points to Russia continuing to move closer to a "U.S. style democracy" every day. We’re very gratified to see that the ACLU and Libertarian Party is further pursuing this issue and as a party are cosidering weighing in, as this ridiculously discriminatory law greatly affects our candidate’s abilities to participate in the electoral process as well.
This of course, is entirely the intent of the law, as designed by the Republican and Democratic parties who are responsible for its creation.
The technicality referred to in the 10th circuit ruling is one issue, but Demo Rep points to the greater problem. Why should separate NOT be equal? Why should minor parties be effectively repressed by laws MADE BY major parties that have the effect of keeping alternative platforms and voices from participating in our “democracy.” (I question whether we still have this, and can probably speak for many in the party on this comfortably).

Look at what Nader and Romanelli are experiencing, documented well by Mr. Winger on this site.
Then also look at what the Russian system is experiencing vis a vis minor parties, also documented here (thank you Mr. Winger)
The similarities are striking and points to Russia continuing to move closer to a “U.S. style democracy” every day.

]]> By: Demo Rep http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/21/aclu-asks-for-rehearing-in-new-mexico-libertarian-ballot-access-case/comment-page-1/#comment-165521 Demo Rep Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:13:35 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/21/aclu-asks-for-rehearing-in-new-mexico-libertarian-ballot-access-case/#comment-165521 One more separate is NOT equal case. ANY brains in the ACLU ??? One more separate is NOT equal case.

ANY brains in the ACLU ???

]]>