Comments:Wikinews interviews Kent Mesplay, Green Party presidential candidate

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Great Interview!

I hate to break it to you Kent, but it is a 2 party system. It's nice how optimistic you are about your chances, but I don't really think you could win. When you see the news, which is what everyone watches, all you see is left and right, no center (except for the occasional Ralph Nader mock). Unless one campaign was consumed with scandal and another with some sort of crappy candidate, a 3rd party candidater is merely expressing his freedom of speech. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Wikinews interviews Kent Mesplay, Green Party presidential candidate edit

With unstoppable integrity, one can vote one's conscience and heal the world. With the, we can develop each others' integrity until everyone learns to vote their conscience. With mindfulness meditation, one can experience enough personal security to vote one's conscience. With ranked-choice voting (or instant runoff voting), you can vote both your conscience and the lesser evil. One-person one-vote democracy is mob-rule. Watching Democrats and Republicans activates mirror neurons in the brain, causing monkey-see-monkey-do. Lemmings follow their newscasters into eternal war and devastation. Dr. Mesplay, what do you think about taxing violence products at 100% to pay the costs of using violence products? That would make violent movie production and weapons manufacturing nonprofit endeavors. That would compensate victims of violence to restore victims to wholeness. The US would still have the strongest defense in the world, but out of the kindness of the volunteers' hearts, not because of profit motive. How would that affect stockpiling weapons and selling them to other countries? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 02:47, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply