Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday August 08 2016, @03:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the representation-is-a-privilege dept.

Ballot Access News reports:

On August 5, U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer, a Bush Jr. appointee, ruled against Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in their debates lawsuit. The case had been filed on September 28, 2015, and is Johnson v Commission on Presidential Debates, U.S. District Court, D.C., 1:15cv-1580.

[...] The 27-page decision[Redirects to a PDF] [...] says, "Because Plaintiffs have no standing and because antitrust laws govern commercial markets and not political activity, those claims fail as a matter of well-established law."

[...] Footnote three, based on the judge's own research (or the research of her clerks), has factual errors. The judge relied on election returns published by the FEC, but the FEC returns do not say which candidates were [...] in states with a majority of electoral college votes, and the opinion's list of candidates is erroneous.

[...] Another factual error in the decision is on page 21. The decision says Ralph Forbes, an independent candidate for U.S. Senate, lost a case over debates in the U.S. Supreme Court in 1998. Actually Forbes was a candidate for U.S. House.

In the comments, Richard Winger notes a similar case.

the lawsuit Level the Playing Field v FEC is still pending, before another judge, in the same court

The presidential debates were previously moderated by the League of Women Voters (1976, 1980, 1984). The Democrats and Republicans screwed things up in 1988. The Commission on Presidential Debates, a corporation controlled by the Democratic and Republican parties, has run each of the presidential debates held since 1988.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday August 08 2016, @11:07PM

    by jmorris (4844) on Monday August 08 2016, @11:07PM (#385527)

    uh huh. Here is the money quote:

    An abundant supply of natural gas "delays up to decades the time period over which renewable energies become economically competitive," the researchers write. And if natural gas makes energy cheaper, the study argues, people will use more energy rather than cut back to save money.

    In other words they are just talking about their hokey religion and totem objects like windmills. As to the actual reality of whether gas is cleaner than coal, they say, "Natural gas has been promoted as a "bridge fuel" even by some environmentalists because it emits half as much CO2 as coal to produce a given amount of electricity. "

    But all that misses the point entirely, that whether one fuel is cleaner than another should count more than bullshit religion like AGW. CO2 is not a very dangerous burn product. I have an unvented natural gas powered space heater and clothes dryer in my home. The gas powered hot water heater is vented, go figure. A hell of a lot of people have natural gas ranges in their kitchens. Because they do not produce any waste products harmful to humans unless they malfunction and produce carbon monoxide due to incomplete combustion. (Please buy a CO detector is you have natural gas service in your home!)

    You certainly wouldn't want to sit in a room with an unvented coal fired furnace. Even the large coal fired power generation plants with scrubbers still put a lot undesirable stuff out.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2