cannabisnews.com: Greens Storm Station During Senate Debate 





Greens Storm Station During Senate Debate 
Posted by FoM on October 28, 2000 at 16:34:19 PT
By John Howard, The Associated Press 
Source: Orange County Register
U.S. Senate contenders Dianne Feinstein and Tom Campbell clashed sharply Friday on drugs, economics and immigration as raucous Green Party protesters rushed the television station where they debated and demanded their candidate be allowed to participate. There were no injuries. After the hour-long debate, Feinstein left the building through a rear entrance to avoid some 100 protesters who remained jammed in the building's lobby. 
Supporters of Green Party candidate Medea Benjamin began their protest on the sidewalk in front of KRON-TV, then pushed into the station's lobby. Benjamin was excluded from the debate under ground rules adopted by the station and the Feinstein and Campbell campaigns. About a dozen police officers blocked the demonstrators and arrested two people. One was identified as Northern California campaign director June Brashares. Both were released. The protest did not delay the debate's start. In an upstairs studio, Campbell and Feinstein differed on immigration and the Republican Campbell's proposal to help addicts kick the habit by giving them access to drugs. Campbell said the federal government's plan to give $1.3 billion to Colombia for an anti-drug program was the first step toward a "third world jungle war." "Don't spend this money on Colombia, spend it on rehabilitation," he said. Feinstein said though current anti-drug efforts have not succeeded, she opposed offering drugs to addicts. "It's folly to legalize narcotics," she said. Campbell also said Feinstein supported a national ID citizenship card - which she denied - and restricted levels of legal immigration. They also clashed on Social Security financing, with Democratic incumbent Feinstein opposing Campbell's proposal - similar to that of Texas Gov. George W. Bush - to invest some Social Security funds in the stock market. Campbell, 48, a Harvard-trained Stanford University law school professor with a decade in the House, has raised issues he says distinguish him from Feinstein. Those include replacing the personal income tax with a national sales tax. He also notes that he refuses to accept contributions from special-interest political action committees. Feinstein, 67, opposes Campbell's position on taxes and accepts PAC funds. Both favor gun control and abortion rights.Campbell also claims that Feinstein has conflicts of interest arising from her husband's financial dealings and that she failed to fully disclose them. Campbell raised the issue in their first debate Tuesday in Santa Monica. He hammered it again at a San Francisco news conference Friday afternoon. Feinstein's husband, international investment banker Richard C. Blum, has an array of financial interests, including some in China affected by Feinstein's Senate votes, Campbell said. Feinstein denies Campbell's assertions. She said she has supplied complete disclosure information. A Los Angeles Times poll released Friday showed Feinstein with a 25-point lead over Campbell among likely voters. The survey's margin of error was plus or minus 4 percentage points. ELECTION: Dianne Feinstein and Tom Campbell trade jabs; third party fights to be heard. Please send comments to: ocregister link.freedom.comSource: Orange County Register (CA)Author: John Howard, The Associated Press Published: October 28, 2000Address: P.O. Box 11626, Santa Ana, CA 92711 Fax: (714) 565-3657 Copyright 2000 The Orange County RegisterContact: letters link.freedom.com Website: http://www.ocregister.com/ Related Articles & Web Site:The Green Partyhttp://www.greenparty.org/Campbell Urges Change in Drug War http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7094.shtmlDeclaring War on the War on Drugshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7073.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #2 posted by dddd on October 28, 2000 at 22:16:59 PT
Feinkanstein
 Right on Legalizeit. Dianne is an excellent example of a useless,heavily entrenched,career politician who is completly out of touch with reality,and anyone who is not a special interest. Her commercials are really sickening. It is unbelievably scandalous that how public debates have been hijacked by the republicrat overlords.It's perhaps even more shocking,that they are getting away with it,and have minimized any public outrage. Even more scary,is the apparent lack of concern from the general public.Of course this is mainly due to a skewed media cartel,and the criminal political empire that owns it. I like to dream of the glorious concept of switching all the resources and funding that goes into the WoDs',,to a war on political corruption ,and white collar crime...........dddd
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by legalizeit on October 28, 2000 at 17:53:46 PT
OJ syndrome!
Dianne and the other Drug Warriors are suffering from good old OJ syndrome - they're so in denial about their little out-of-hand drug war that they can't even see what the truth is or means. Feinstein's comment, "It's folly to legalize narcotics," typifies this and also typifies the Drug Warriors' habit of using scary words like "narcotics" and "abuse" to drive their point home to the bleating masses.Read into a little, Feinstein's statement would say, "It's folly to end the folly of the Drug War." What folly!In reality, of course, Prop 36 has nothing to do with "legalizing narcotics," it only deals with how first and second time nonviolent drug offenders are dealt with. Feinstein (whose ad has a fast-scrolling list of all the police and judicial agencies that support her) just throws out the L-word so all the prohib-leaning public will get bent out of shape that the "dastardly hippie legalizers" want to be able to sell dope to 3-year-olds.I think it's a mockery that the media, on all levels, denies non-RepubliCrats the chance to be seen in a debate. It's nothing short of a conspiracy! At least through the Internet prospective voters have a chance to review ALL candidates'positions on the issues. It will take more election cycles to get where we need to be, but with things like free Internet and $300 computers, more and more of the common folk are getting on the Net, and I think the Net will greatly shape the political future as it has already shaped and strengthened the anti-prohibition movement.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: