1) In 2002, Jim Ryan said that Libertarian candidate Cal Skinner couldn’t win and therefore doesn’t have to be responsible for anything he says.

2) He didn’t want to “surprise” Topinka and Blagojevich

3) He had to do what network affiliates want

All of these reasons amount to absolute nonsense. But, okay, let’s take Mr. Anderson on his word. Here are my point-by-point questions:

1) Why was Alan Keyes allowed to debate in 2004? Talk about a guy who had no chance of winning and took no responsibility for what he said. Whitney is an excellent speaker and I’m sure a skilled debater. Keyes is just a nut job. Yet…

2) How is this a surprise? This isn’t China, folks. We do live in a democracy where open debate is supposedly encouraged. Topinka has already said that she would debate Whitney. And Blagojevich has had his million dollar flunkies try to kick Whitney off the ballot (unsuccessfully) so we know that he is aware of the possibility that Whitney may end up in the debates. Would it really be all that surprising?

3) Whitney says at least one affiliate said they would like to see him in the debate. Have the others explicitly said they DON’T want him in the debate?

One way you can help ensure Illinois voters get the best information, not cheap, half-assed information, this coming election is to contact your local newspapers, radio stations and TV stations, and tell them you want to see more Whitney coverage. Tell them you want to see Whitney debate.

Originally posted here by Modern Vertebrate.