| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| "Law & Order" actor promoting bi-partisan candidates, Internet vote |
| 2006-12-07 |
| "Law & Order" star Sam Waterston plays a prosecutor on TV, but offscreen he has a new role as pitchman for Unity08 - a grass-roots drive to run a bipartisan presidential ticket in two years with candidates chosen by a national primary on the Internet. "I've been waiting for an idea like this for a long time. ... A nonpartisan process of nominating a presidential and vice presidential candidate ... taking money out of the race," Waterston said yesterday in a telephone press conference announcing his support. The 66-year-old Yale University-educated star of "The Killing Fields" said he is not a candidate for office and that the movement is not supporting anyone at this time. The group, whose backers include ex-Jimmy Carter aide Hamilton Jordan, former Gerald Ford adviser Doug Bailey and ex-AOL chief Steve Case, is still working out procedures for qualifying candidates, who will be required to run in bipartisan pairs. Under the plan, registered voters could cast ballots online in a nationwide primary to pick the ticket. Then volunteers would petition states to get the Unity08 candidates on ballots for the 2008 election, the group's Web site says. "Through Unity08, for the first time we are going to throw out the back-room deals," Waterston says in a video posted on the site. "You'll vote. You'll decide. Not the consultants and spin doctors. Not the special interests. Not the lobbyists." |
| Posted by:Dar |
| #12 Actually, we should keep an eye on this and elect a war pres in 2008. Waterstain would get the vapors over that, wouldn't he ? |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-12-07 17:55 |
| #11 LOL, tu! |
| Posted by: Raj 2006-12-07 13:33 |
| #10 Oh, well, Yale educated. Ya mean...like Kerry? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-12-07 13:25 |
| #9 Doh - PIMF... |
| Posted by: Raj 2006-12-07 13:19 |
| #8 tu - Actually, we should listen to him because he's an Yale University-educated actor... |
| Posted by: Raj 2006-12-07 13:18 |
| #7 Why would anyone care about a non-partisan nominating process? If there's nothing of import to decide, if there aren't two (or more) sides to the issue, why even have the election? I believe this is code-speak for: We Know What's Best for You. Don't Trouble Your Tiny Brains with Important Things that Don't Concern You. |
| Posted by: Dreadnought 2006-12-07 12:15 |
| #6 "Taking money out of the race" If they really want that, you must first take the POWER out of the results of the race. If there is nothing of importance to influence, there wouldn't be much incentive to try. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2006-12-07 11:13 |
| #5 For the first few elections, yes, eLarson. But then they discovered it was a bad idea to force direct competitors to share an office. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-12-07 11:05 |
| #4 Hey, he's an actor. We should all listen to him. Because he's an actor... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-12-07 11:05 |
| #3 "I've been waiting for an idea like this for a long time. ... A nonpartisan process of nominating a presidential and vice presidential candidate ... taking money out of the race," Waterston said yesterday in a telephone press conference announcing his support. "Taking money out of the race" will never, never, never, NEVER happen and Sam knows this. It's just a polite fig leaf to cover the fact that Sam's choices haven't been electable thus far. However, if this idea gets any traction, my vote is for JoeMendiola! Joe! Joe! Joe! |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-12-07 11:02 |
| #2 Isn't that sorta how they used to do it back in the day? First place gets the Presidency; second gets the Veep? |
| Posted by: eLarson 2006-12-07 10:40 |
| #1 I think I prefer |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2006-12-07 00:56 |