From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: Presidential Candidate Larry Agran to be Arraigned
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 07:00:45 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Apr3.213552.5446@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:

+>In article <adams.702322094@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
+>>harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (Harel Barzilai) writes:

+>>>        NEW YORK, NY -- Democratic presidential candidate Larry Agran
+>>>will be arraigned Monday in Bronx Criminal Court on charges of
+>>>disorderly conduct, filed when he was arrested after requesting that
+>>>he be included in a Democratic presidential cand idates' debate at
+>>>Lehman College.

+>>After raising a ruckus and refusing to sit down and be quiet.  He came with
+>>the intent of disrupting an event to which he wasn't invited.  If I did the
+>>same thing, even were I on the ballot for President, I would expect to be
+>>arrested for disturbing the peace.  What's the big surprise.  This was staged.

+>Not from the news accounts I read.  (It was staged, but he didn't "make
+>a ruckus.")

+>>>        "This was a political arrest, pure and simple," Agran said.
+>>>"The event was billed as, quote, a Democratic presidential candidates'
+>>>debate on urban America.  I'm one of only four active Democratic
+>>>candidates on next Tuesday's New York primary ballot, so it naturally
+>>>follows that I should have been included."

+>>No, it doesn't.  Who is included in the debate is completely up to the
+>>organizers.  You just haven't seemed to grasp this particular principle.

+>That's not the issue.  The issue discussed above isn't whether they should 
+>have been forced to include him, but whether they have an ethical obligation 
+>to include him.


+>>Just because someone is on the ballot as a Democrat does not mean they
+>>automatially must be given recognition by the party.  Just as David Duke
+>>was repudiated by the Republican Party.  Additionally, the Party is a private,
+>>non-governmental organization.  He doesn't even have recourse in court.

+>I don't even LIKE Agran, but this is Wrong.  Wrong.  Wrong.  
+>They use TAXPAYER MONEY to run the primaries.
+>Who gets on the primary ballot is determined BY LAW.  That makes primaries
+>PUBLIC events, not private ones.

	And IS HE NOT ON THE PRIMARY BALLOT.  What Agran has always complained
about is media access and access to democratic events such as candidates 
forums.  The party has some disgression in who it promotes in its forums.
If not, then Lyndon Larouche, Gene Mcarthy, Ron Kovics and all of the
rest of the minor people running would also be "entitled".  The reason for
these forums is to put across major candidates and the party has a right
to determine who it considers major.  Agran has never had any more than
a tiny bit of support, he has never done anything in any of the primaries
that would indicate that he is a major candidate.




+>>>        Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown were the only two candidates
+>>>invited to the forum.  Agran and Eugene McCarthy were not.

+>>Again, up to the sponsers of the debate.

+>So?  And why did they ignore these candidates?

	Because Engene McCarthy is a joke.  Its not a serious campaign, its
a game with him.  Most people in the democratic party know this and are
not going to waste precious media exposure on the likes of him.
	Agran has been attempting from the very beginning to muscle his
way into the "majors" by playing the victimized, excluded poor humble
candidate.  He managed very early to get portions of the national democratic
party angry at him quite early.  Now, after three major candidates have
dropped out, he expects to be included?


+>>>        Candidates Clinton and Brown watched Agran's arrest from the
+>>>dais, but said nothing.  Agran last debated Clinton and Brown at a
+>>>candidates' forum in Buffalo on March 21.

+>>As well they should have.  This was a matter for the police and the
+>>organizers.

+>Really?  You'd think Jerry Brown, who thinks the system is corrupt and
+>is trying to change the system, would have spoken out.  But he didn't.
+>This (among other things) shows his hypocrisy.

	So, apprently Jerry Brown should have taken time and media attention
away from his own campaign to support poor Agran the victim.  Things dont
work that way.  Agran is a whiny loser and has been dismissed as such for
a very long time.  Dont expect Brown to go out and promote another candidate
no matter what his agenda is.


+>>At this point, he's nothing more than a troublemaker.

+>Well, that's what happens when the media ignores you.  You can't be
+>anything else.  Of course, if you read this weeks Nation, it explains
+>how it's mainly Agran's fault, because he never set up a real campaign.

	Well, thats what happens when you go out and claim the DNC is out
to "get" you and you dont have any support within the party except at
the fringes.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.men,soc.women,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.correct