Posted on 11/05/2007 2:08:24 PM PST by Santa Fe_Conservative
NEW YORK - Stephen Colbert has dropped his bid for the White House.
His announcement came after the South Carolina Democratic Executive Council voted last week to keep the host of "The Colbert Report" off the state's primary ballot. The vote was 13-3.
Colbert poses as a conservative talk-show host on the Comedy Central show.
"Although I lost by the slimmest margin in presidential election history — only 10 votes — I have chosen not to put the country through another agonizing Supreme Court battle," Colbert said Monday in a statement. "It is time for this nation to heal."
Colbert had said he would run only in his native South Carolina, a key primary state. He said he planned to run as a Democrat and a Republican — so he could lose twice. Colbert, 43, later declined to file with the GOP, which has a much higher filing fee ($35,000) than the Democrats ($2,500).
"I want to say to my supporters, this is not over," Colbert said. "While I may accept the decision of the Council, the fight goes on! The dream endures! ... And I am going off the air until I can talk about this without weeping."
In reality, "The Colbert Report" was going off the air because of a strike by Hollywood writers that began Monday. Many talk shows were expected to be shown in repeats during the strike.
The rodents kept him off the ballot because they know he was going to get more votes than several of the rodent candidates, including Hillary’s future running mate, Fat Creep Richardson.
One phone call from Hilldog and it was over.
Who?
So tell me..someone who has seen the show. Is Colbert actually a Conservative..? I always thought he was another Jon Stuart type..Am I wrong??
..the coffee money he stole from the office coffee club ran out
I guess with Kookcinich seeing UFOs their kook capacity was going to hell in a handbasket.
I guess with Kookcinich seeing UFOs their kook capacity was going to hell in a handbasket.
No, but he plays one on TV.
but jon stewart is a real liberal
In that Russert interview, Colbert was almost actually funny, especially about his affection for South Carolina.
Stephen Colbert is a host of the Colbert Report on Comedy Central. http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_colbert_report/index.jhtml
The show is hilarious, if you have Comedy Central take a few minutes to watch the show.
He was grew up in Charleston, so his affection for South Carolina is genuine.
Who?
He’s a satirist who takes people like Bill O’Reilly and blows things up absurdly out of proportion for humorous effect. While it is mostly hyperbole of conservatism, he’s actually pretty good at it and he comes off as funny without being obnoxious.
The funny thing is that he was actually polling in the 20% range in the national polls as a third party.
It doesn’t seem right — anyone who pays the ballot fee and or collects the valid petition signatures ought to be allowed on the ballot.
I couldn't care less about Colbert, but this disparity in filing fees is troubling. The filing fee for any particular office should be set by the State, and should be the same for all candidates regardless of their political party.
Why not make it $10, and then anyone could run for the GOP nomination? Or the Democrat nomination, for that matter.
Nonsense. Let's be very clear about something. The public offices for which candidates file belong to the people - they do NOT belong to the political parties, although it's been clear for a long time that both the GOP and the Dems actually do believe that our political offices and our government are their property.
So yes, the PEOPLE of a state, through their delegated authority to their elected government, can certainly tell the political parties how they can and cannot participate in the election process with respect to satisfying the state-mandated election regulations, and provided the rules are applied equally and uniformly.
Why not make it $10, and then anyone could run for the GOP nomination? Or the Democrat nomination, for that matter.
That would be perfectly okay. Any qualified law-abiding citizen has the right to file for public office. Even no filing fee would be okay. What is not morally and ethically justifiable, however, are exorbitant filing fees deliberately designed to deny the opportunity to file to those without the support of big money.
Where was you grew up?
;-)
I only saw him once, at the White House Correspondents Dinner last year and he was anything BUT funny. If I were the Bushes I’d have been out of there within a minute or two of his adolescent skit.
Yeah, that speech was horrible, I’ll admit. I still remember Helen Thomas’s sashay...
He’s been getting better since then.
Unclear I am. Like Yoda I sound.
Apples and Oranges...Can the state tell the party what it's party platforms are?
The party is a private organization. No one is being forced to file DIM or GOP. If you don't like the party rules, file independent.
LOL! Funny. Too bad he dropped out.
The party is a private organization. No one is being forced to file DIM or GOP. If you don't like the party rules, file independent.
More nonsense. Yes, the party is a private organization and the state has no jurisdiction over its platforms. "Platforms" are simply collections of ideas, and government has no lawful jurisdiction to control ideas.
Filing fees, however, are paid to the government, not to the parties, thus the state does have jurisdiction.
It's ironic that you don't even perceive the inherent contradiction of your own argument: "If you don't like the party rules, file independent."
When you can honestly answer the question "Who sets the filing fee if I file independent?" you may begin to grasp the principles involved.
So what? The Candidate is asking to put his name on the ballot with the party's affiliation. That is what the candidate is paying for. The Party is setting what it thinks is appropriate.
When you can honestly answer the question "Who sets the filing fee if I file independent?" you may begin to grasp the principles involved.
Exactly, file independent if you want.
The short answer is "Why not?".
The complete answer is, as I stated previously, since the political parties DO NOT OWN public offices, and since the payment of a filing fee TO THE GOVERNMENT to run for office is a civil legal requirement under the jurisdiction of the elected government OF THE PEOPLE (and that's the government of ALL the people, BTW), then the setting of the qualifications and amounts of the filing fees are none of the business of the political parties.
So yes, anyone should be able to file as a Republican, as a Democrat, or as any other party affiliation they wish. It is then the prerogative and the responsibility of the rest of the members of that party to either give or to withhold support to that candidate. If the candidate is unable to persuade others to vote for them, then their electoral aspirations will quickly come to naught, and the system will have "worked".
The party is entitled to support and endorse a candidate, or it can, if desired, repudiate and work to oppose a candidate, even one who claims to be "one of them". The filing of a fee to run for office, however, is not a party matter. It is the exercise of a legal civil right by a citizen, and falls under government jurisdiction. The very fact that filing fees are paid to government offices/entities and not to the political parties themselves demonstrates this.
The current status quo where we have allowed the party establishments to usurp the control of the election process has led to a situation where fees and requirements are arbitrarily manipulated in order to stifle competition from outside the party elites and lock-in their control.
If the major political parties were treated by the same standards that the government applies to businesses, both would have long since been prosecuted under federal RICO statutes, especially the Democrats. Both parties are corrupt racketeering enterprises and the only reason most of their high muckety-mucks aren't in prison is because they enjoy the luxury of political immunity.
What's the filing fee if you file independent in South Carolina?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.