CNN

I think it is a middle finger to the rules of candidacy to not allow Colbert to be put on the SC ballot. Edwards is clearly threatend but Colbert and took an unfair shot to get him removed. Colbert allready has publicity because of his TV show which is a red flag to any poloticians running. South Carolina! LET COLBERT RUN!

To Jason in Greenville, NC
Edwards was born in Seneca, SC. It is in Oconee County, the upper west corner of the state.

"I kind of like Colbert on the ballot myself," Edwards said. "I think it adds a little bit of interest. I like it though. I think it's fun."

Spoken like the true unadulterated Air Head he is! If you like fun John move to Coney Island. The Presidential Campaign is no place for FUN SEEKERS.
A Nation is at stake or have you not noticed?

So understanding that intelligence is a level of genius which lets one know that with freedom and independence one has the right to question what the teacher says about the constitution which only accumulated knowledge.

The Teacher only speaks the Truthiness about it.

Are you more intelligent than a fifth grader, because the Constitution is found in grade six sociology.

To every office in a democracy: elect an individual who can be held individually accountable in both representing the public and its own requirements for taxation. Personally cast a ballot as if you would vouch for that one person; the democratic voter is accountable. The Electoral College allows a small group of the public to meet with such a federal individual. Yet Congressional Representation that determines that College amount should meet the ration of one for every thirty thousand legal voters.

My own Nation has a Queen held too separate and a Governor General too 'Honorable' and 'Majestic' to act against these disruptive and improper parties in competition for a co-operative office.

The States have the power of impeachment should the President not act, the Senate members must drop their affiliation with the Parties to regain jurisdiction, and the Congress is lost in this two party quagmire.

The Estates must rise to act against this party corruption: The Clergy, the press, and the people must respond. The Estate of the bureaucracy made better for it, and the Estate of the amendment party finalized.

Because who reads this?

The party system is against the oath of office taken by every official in office. It is against the oath, such as it is: not allowed to swear to answer to a foreign body separate to the Government of the United States of America before said government, and this is the reason one does not need to swear to a deity such as God.

In truth every member in the Senate, Congress, and the Supreme Court is in violation of that oath accept for the few independents; only the president has the right to hold such an active party status; oh and Governors have the right to an active party status as well but this administrative party must be held separate in each State and limited to the name of the Presiding president or Governor. It is the President's requirement to correct this, and correct the affiliation the White House has with any member in congress beyond the official Government method as it is illegal when a party members who are also government officials convene for party business to undermine the official Government body.

"If their was only someone, some independent, with a public voice who could correct this!"

The party itself should exist only to introduce an amendment change to Congress in response of the people's want and petitioned or membered voice. The president is chosen for the ability to make decisions and relate to foreign government on behalf of the all the united states of America. Members of Congress and the Senate could then raise the point of support for any or multiple parties during election. The party should be for and against, or in place to protect or remove present amendments.

The National Patriot act is such an amendment found mirrored in the drafts of confederation but unless it is defined by Congress as law and officated by the Senate, signed by the President and used by the Supreme court judges according to their requirements of leveled jurisprudence, yet still outside federal juristiction the States are not bound without an amendment and can operate how they wish in a Republic.
The President is commissioned and empowered with the requirement to create bureaus and uphold such laws and public requirements. The President basically holds power of attorney over the congress, but the President should not be able to hold empirical power as no monarch no one person can ever be crowned or aloowed such powers.

The Constitution is not a picture, and the Party method has not been amended into it at present.

The party... have fun

What's novel about Colbert? Didn't a comedian (Pat Paulsen) already do this bit?

@Jon -

Claiming that a political party isn't a private organization is absurdity at it's finest. Truly you have no grasp of how the electoral process works or how political organization fit into that and until you do, your continued assertions that someones rights have been violated are simply stupid. Sorry if that's harsh to hear but reality is seldom pleasant for people too ignorant to do basic research. Since the rest of your "argument" is based upon flawed understanding of the political system, whatever else you try to say is pointless to argue.

What I get is that people are more than willing to let others decide who can and can not run for office, and give themselves basically no say in who runs for office.

The Democratic party is not just a private organization, as some would like to deem it. What this simply means is that the average person can not run. If Colbert is a member of the party, and is otherwise legally entitled to place his name on the ballot, he simply should, period.

The fact that people are OK with this slap to all of us, and that they are making weak excuses and being insulting shows that the claims to the contrary are weak, and must be backed up with personal attack.

That is what is appalling. People willingly handing over the reigns of government to a cabal. Today it's Colbert, next time, who is it going to be? Someone else they don't happen to like for whatever reason?

This is truly a disgraceful behavior, and that people support it are the ones who should be ashamed, for they are helping to destroy whatever vestige of democratic ideals we have left in this country.

The country as an experiment in democracy is rapidly failing, and people seem to be willing to cheer on its demise.

But hey, what do I know. I'm appallingly ignorant of history, right? I think that was the best argument made by anyone about this whole thing. Concise, to the point, and logical. Or not.

@Jon –

You still don't get it, and it's appalling. The Democratic Party is not a public organization and as such has EVERY RIGHT to determine for itself who can and cannot run under it's banner. In this nations history there have been many political parties in this country, some more successful then others. If Colbert truly wishes to run for president then he is more then FREE TO DO SO, all he has to to is either pick an organization that will have him (maybe the Green party would want him) or run as an independent, or even start his own political party. Whether that is successful or not is entirely up to the candidate but at the end of the day, his rights were not impugned and to think that they were shows a startling lack of understanding on how the political process in this country works, and has worked for over 200 years. You sir, should be ashamed of yourself.

Not very democratic... Not inclusive. Don't we want to attract young people to the polls?

It's interesting to see some of the responses here. People seem to be more than willing to throw away their ability to run for office, and allowing a small group of individuals to hand pick who is allowed to run.

Of course he can run as an independent. But that does not usually get very far, and if he can legally run as a Democrat, then the people of the Democratic party should have the chance to vote for him.

This is supposedly a country of the people. Not a country of a backroom committee. And if anyone wants to run, they should be allowed to. You don't need a national campaign. History is replete with "native son" candidates. The lack of historical perspective on this is simply disgraceful.

But what is most disgraceful of all is the cheering on of the failure of American democracy, and the confiscation of power from the public by a few members of the ruling elite.

Those of you who wish to chastise me for actually thinking this is still a free country are right. I should stop being so naive. This is now an oligarchy, and the public at large is rapidly becoming completely powerless in how it is run.

Good for the USA. Turning into the Soviet Union one day at a time.

you cannot win Edwards,2004 proves it you cannot win,your home state,said no.

There is no Constitutional right to run for office. The two parties write election law and "enforce" election law. And they don't want any input from "The People", unless they can have our votes. We are not a democracy and never have been. And any candidate who dares say that the system should fundamentally change is deemed by the parties, the media, and those who gain more wealth from both, to be "unelectable", "extremist", "out of the mainstream", "fringe", and so on.

Colbert's "run" was and is a joke, for ratings and personal fame, disguised as satire but never intended to be anything more than a way to have him and his show get a lot of free advertising. The not-so-funny thing is that the joke is, and has always been, on us.

Well, if people really want to go the distance for Colbert, I recommend a protest. Not just calling and leaving voicemails or e-mails. Or even just writing letters. We know those are just going to be trashed.

I recommend a Jericho style protest. Not that I was a fan, but Jericho fans got CBS to reverse their decision by sending in bags of peanuts. When CBS was inundated with peanutes, they reversed their decision.

Similarly, I propose sending in empty Doritos bags to the S.C. dem hq. (full ones might be too cumbersome to mail). That'll send a message.

What a shame it is that SC Democrats have refused Colbert his Constitutional right to run for elected office.
It would appear that "democracy" and "democrats" are mutually exclusive terms. And individual rights, And political philosophy.

That's what Colbert gets for being in the pockets of snack foods. Hey Colbert, out kids are fat! Didn't you get the memo?

"It'll be a slap in the face to democracy."

Honestly, I think it's about time it got slapped in the face. The entire system needs to wake up and get its act together.

And that's what Colbert did. He slapped 'em good.

Careful, Democrats: your actions here seem almost Republican.

Terry, El Paso-

Actually I think Michael may have been refering to the national landscape as a whole, rather than this specific incident. While our situation may not be as dire as an Orwellian future, it does have some striking simularities. For example, the transition from our attacks on Al Qaida to our attacks on Iraq smacks of the Two-Minute Hate transition from hatred towards East Asia to hatred of Eurasia (if I remember the countries correctly). In addition, the Bush administration's mentality of "You're either with us or against us" also strongly correlates with the mentality of Oceania in 1984. Overall, it may be hyperbole, but the comparison is valid.

It's ridiculous and sad that people are criticizing Edwards for saying Colbert's campaign was fun or even accusing him of promoting Colbert in order to gain ground on Obama. You can criticize Edwards for many things, but for having a sense of humor? And to those who say that his calling the campaign "fun" is inappropriate or even dangerous at a time of national crisis, one has to wonder who is really more dangerous: the man who pays attention to key issues and occasionally jokes about non-important issues (like a "campaign" by a political satirist) or candidates who continue to harp on things which only distract from the dire issues facing our country, raising a stink about gay marriage and immigration, for example, when they should be focused on health care (private or public), poverty, and the environment.

Daniel from Florida, I applaud your comment. I think Americans have never felt left alone in a lonely plannet any other time than now....It is so clear that you can not be a postman and run for presidency. I feel that the American people have been so much controlled and this is more than a monarchy. Then can we say that there is no more freedom in this country and Other countries are better off at least they don't have the freedom that they might feel some day has been taken away from them?

A new general election poll released this morning has John Edwards destroying his Republican opponents nationally. Link.

I think Colbert is nothing but a media employee who is trying to bring humour on the ticker!!! They want to blurr you from clinton, Obama ,edward and other republicans from the blunders they are doing. Now we can talk about Colbert. This is an amazing political tricks people!!

TO: roger, conway, sc

Just want to point out that you made a mistake and I'm sure it was unintentional of course (cough, cough). Excuse me there as I had something in my throat that wanted to come out.

That aside, Edwards made a statement welcoming Colbert the other day. I don't think that sounds like he waited until after the decision. So just that you can now have your """""facts"""" corrected, I wanted to let you know that.

Of course I'm sure this was just an oversight on your part.

"The Big Brother is watching, Jon.
Oddly enough, rereading 1984 is like a study in events being reported on…" – Michael, New York

Could you illustrate your point, Michael. I read that novel a few years ago, so perhaps there are some parts that I don't recall. What in 1984 reminds you of Colbert's short presidential campaign? There were no elections as I recall in 1984. I'm an Orwell fan and would love to understand the analogy you are making.

Edwards after the fact says he would have liked for Colbert to be on the SC ballot...had it have happened Edwards & his wife would have found something to whin about...these two act just exactly what they are spoiled little rich attorneys...cry babies & whiners

Why are people so shocked to learn that running for office is no longer a viable option in a police state? Democratic fees are $2,500 to file, and the GOP charges something like $35,000 to file for running.

Surprise.

Not anybody can run for President anymore. This is no longer a free country. The US Constitution is nothing more than a piece of paper to those in charge these days.

Good, the more that wake up, the better off we are into getting our Country back. We used to be a country By the People and For the People. Now we're For the Controlled Population, By the Party Elite.

I do not know how it was decided that Colbert would not make a viable candidate while there is a Facebook petition of over 1 million young people ready to vote for him. I say John Edwards had to pay somebody to get that decision, thats alright though. We'll just have to keep working on Gore.

the funny thing is all these people saying EDWARDS is a horrible candidate because he said it would make the elections fun.....like that cancels out everything hes done and everything he stands for. he is a human being and everything he says and does is always in the public eye. how about instead of judging him for 1 comment why dont you look at his commitment to change. take a look at what he stands for, instead of being the INSTANT GRATIFICATION americans you are and you make decisions LICKETY SPIT based on nothing!!!!! edwards is actually a good man with some pretty good ideas. patience and research is good for your soul try it out sometime....

I am not even a Democrat, but the Democratic Party is correct to deny Colbert. It has nothing to do with do with violation of democracy. Colbert has no national strategy which is one of main requirement to be a Democratic candidate. You cannot simply run for one state if you are running for president. The Democratic Party has the right to deny such candidacy within their own rank. Colbert can run as an independent if he wants.

so much for us being a government of the people. apparently only gazillionaires and career politicians are allowed to represent us. sad day for the US.

Viability???

Gravel < Stephen Colbert

Wait a minute, the Republicans demanded 35,000 to allow Colbert to run. Why did CNN forget to mention this?

that is un called and unfair. it will hurt much the democratic partys as well it thing stephen run as a american as was ross perot did in last elction.

Totally amazing and more proof what a joke the political process is. The republicans require a small fortune up front, the democrats will allow you to get on with just signatures but both have the final say so on whether someone can run. And they wonder why people are fed up with elections and politicians. This year is ridiculous. It has been nonstop campaigning since the last election and this individual is fed up with it already.

how could anyone support Ted Hitler for President?

They did the right thing by excluding him for the ballot. As much as I enjoy the Colbert report, it would have been more of a slap to the face of democracy if the presidential ballot were used to hype his status as a political comedian.

It would have been a shame to factor "What if?" questions if Colbert were to capture enough of a margin to influence the South Carolina results. And if people are truly emphatic about voting Colbert, they are still able to carry out the joke with write-ins.

Colbert should run for "Emperor"

The presidency is nothing compared to thee "emperorcy".

Umm.. I believe Edward's campaign made a few funnies this past week. How do we know he's a "serious" candidate? So what is he doing on the ballot?

no he's not serious about running for president so while waste his time ,and eveyone elses, he hasnt held office? would you trust him to run our country, he'd proably win to...it'll be a slap in face,

I completely agree with you Jon Nadelberg, to an extent. I just don't see any candidate (Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Independent) that's represents the typical voter. Stephen would have been the only candidate that understands the voter’s point-of-view. Now, all we have are the same old “giant douches” and “turd sandwiches” on the ballot.

How could the South Carolina part say that Colbert's running was not serious but yet say that Kucinich and Gravel are? Wasn't he polling better then they were? Shouldn't the same standards be used for all?

John Edwards did not seek re-election to the US Senate in 2004. Get your facts straight, Peter.

What? Colbert IS America!!! Where is the ACLU when a South Carolina native son's rights are being trampled by liberals! Mr. Edwards watch out for the write-in campaign!

Clearly the democrats are more concerned with joking around than with the serious business of running our country. Which is why the power should remain in the hands of the responsible republicans.

There are many issues at hand that are no joking matter. The war against barbaric terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the globe. The plots of the other two members of the axis of evil to kill Americans. The assault on the sanctity of marriage by homosexual deviants. The daily murder of innocent infants by their own mothers through an evil process called abortion, which should really be called infanticide. The crisis of marriage whereby couples ignore biblical law and are divorcing at an alarming rate.

It is sickening that there is even a debate to elect the democrats.

ya, I kinda knew what this was all about. It was to boost edward to no. 2 guy and we kick obama out to no. 3, now it didn't work out we can kick his butt. right edward? too bad!
I am just an immigrant but these games I know how they are played in America. Remember we told Obama to say that we can not be able to be out of IRaQ by next march and he did? Now that makes him like hillary and Edward and doesn't stand a star like he used to be. Then to make clinton strong and look presidential, lets play you are attacking me because we I am female. This is not book writing where we just use some pages to increase the size and keep going to and end where we resume. Hillary has been playing games lately and now looks like being attacked by 2 men. We are approaching primaries and I hope she get nomitated after being helped by CNN! Meanwhile, ya Edward has kicked the but of Colbert….It is all the game after we have been so emotional in the last eight years….Hey Colbert, don't worry we are going to change trick to win this game. Obama wont get number one or 2. What do you think? I am just a Kenyan anyway!

Edwards is from North Carolina (Robbins, NC to be exact), but thanks for trying.

Sure, he was denied a spot on the democratic party ballot, but what about running as an independent? I'm not sure of the process, but couldn't he bypass the primaries and jump straight into the endgame as an IND?

I can't believe this. Just imagine how much of Stephen's Formula would have sold if he got in!

Poor Stephen. Boo to those bums who voted him out. Now we're left with ho-hum burnt out candidates who have so much money to play with they can't spend it fast enough while the rest of us suffer. I will miss him.

I would have liked his name on the ballot as well! I agree, his is a slap on the face for democracy.

I guess we can see why Edwards didn't win last time around. Where is Gore?

This is "fun", a campaign is "fun" ? While people are dying in Iraq, while politicians act like Kindergarten Name Callers ? And you call this Fun ? Obviously Edwards is not a Presidential Candidate. He sounds too much like a children's book writer.

Maybe he was too much of an expert on Global Warming.

Does he know there are 99 counties in IA ?

According to Wikipedia, Pat Paulson was on the ballot in New Hampshire several times and came in second to George Bush Sr. in North Dakota!

Have the rules changed? Or do states have different rules on who can run for president? Was Pat Paulson a "nationally viable" candidate as SC rules seem to dictate?

Or have we just become too uptight to have a sense of humor?

So much for the "American Dream" that 'anyone' can become president.

Wow, I'm glad that a political party can overstep its bounds and deny someone's constitutional right. What next, any group with enough power and influence can do the same?

It is a shame, in a country that 'claims' anyone can become president, we clearly see otherwise with Colbert being denied access to the ballot. With turnout as low as it is, even though he had no chance, and I believe he knew this, Mr. Colbert could of brought more of the young, disinfrancshised voters to the box on election day

Clinton would have liked it too. The one poll that included Colbert had the comedian draining votes... from Giuliani, as Clinton expanded her lead! Link.

Yes, I too was surprised to learn that one criteria for making the South Carolina ballot was that each and every candidate have a legitimate, national campaign with a real chance of, what, winning? I think the Democrats in SC did the wrong thing. Everybody who meets the Constitutional guidelines and who pays the fees should be able to run.

Too bad for Edwards...Colbert is the only candidate that Edwards can beat.

Colbert can't run for president and suddenly CNN is looking for a new "associate political editor with strong editing and reporting skills".

Hmmmmmm.....

Its amazing that anyone can see any merit to this stooge's foremat. Is he not unbearablely pathetic?

It was funny until we realized he could win our nomination..

In response to Jon Nadelberg:

The Big Brother is watching, Jon.

Oddly enough, rereading 1984 is like a study in events being reported on...

While I enjoy Mr Colbert's comedy, his attempt to get on the ballot is a slap in the face – a slap in the face to the entire concept of elections. People have and continue to give their lives for the opportunity to vote for their leaders. His candidacy was nothing more than a publicity stunt. And Edwards! "a little more fun?" Go to an amusement park if you want more fun. We need serious candidates.

The thing is that the Democratic Party and Republican Party do have some say who gets to run within their ranks. Nobody says you have to be a Republican or a Democrat, it's just that they hold the most sway over the American public, so if you want a serious chance at a political seat, you pretty much need to join up with them and follow their guidelines.

But a person does not have to be aligned with them. Perot didn't, Nader didn't, Jesse Ventura didn't.

While Colbert's numbers were at 2.3% as a Democrat, remember he was at 12% as an Independent.

I enjoyed his breif run, and I would have liked to see it last longer and seen what would have happened.

I forgot who previously said this on another article (this is not an original comment by me), but Colbert already proved his point by having his cause denied.

WTF wasn't he allowed to run? I don't get those comments by the SC state Democrats. They should just do their GD jobs, nod their heads gratuitously, while they collect the appropriate fees. Where does personal sentiment fit in? I agree this is a lawsuit.

Hey CNN, if I wanted to listen to Colbert (which I don't) I'd watch him on TV. Can someone please direct me to a website where I can learn about the issues?

Ah, John...you may want to reconsider your position there since Colbert would have stolen votes from you...and by the look of things lately, you will need each and every one of them.

Is this an unfair and undemocratic system. Is this what America is all about, the biggest Mafia our Government.

Do you believe this will end Colbert's run for the White House or will he go Independent?
-–> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=864
.

Make him Vice Prez, duh!

@Jon Nadelberg -

Nothing stops Colbert from running on an Independent ticket. He has been prevented from running as a Democrat that is all. His rights have not been impugned and anyone with half and ounce of sense understands that. You'd think if you knew so much about what the "story" of this country is that you would grasp that very simple fact.

There's always the write-in...

To "Jon Nadelberg". He can still run as an independent, just not a democrat. There is no slap in the face of democracy, my friend.

I would have liked Colbert to be included on the ballot, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it a slap in the face of democracy. This was for the Democratic Primary ballot, so if the Democratic Party didn't want Colbert on the ballot, that's their choice because it's their party.

I don't think we could restrict him from the electoral ballot though.

It's not really anti-democracy if you think about it. He wasn't denied the ability to run for president, he was denied the ability to get the democratic nomination from the state of SC. If he want's to run on the SC ballot for president he can. He just has to follow the official process and not run as a Democrat.

They shut out a winner again cuz he's not part of their corpatocracy.

At least with Steve Colbert, we KNOW where he stands! Can you say that about the Clintons? Or Edwards? Or Obama?

I think it's time for A. Whitney Brown (formerly of Saturday Night Live and The Daily Show) to start working for the PoliticaTicker at CNN.COM. "CNN is looking for an associate political editor with strong editing and reporting skills to help the network cover the historic 2008 elections. Primary responsibilities will be to edit and write for the CNN Political Ticker, as well as serve as an off-air reporter. Previous television experience is not required, but strong newswriting ability and experience covering politics are a must."

No, rejecting Colbert was not a slap in the face to Democracy. He has his own tv show where he can make jokes about politics all he wants. Candidates can't force their way on to his show and require it to be serious. His farce candidacy would have been a slap in the face of the elctoral process. It's bad enough that the front runners have to share the stage with people who already have no chance of winning...and you're complaining that an illegal and farcical candidacy was rejected? Go watch the Daily Show, since you seem to equate Comedy Central fake news with real politics.

Interest is something Edwards can't generate at all.It would have been fun to see Colbert whip Edwards butt in his own state.

there must be a state were both can run for free and for laughs?

I submit that people all over the country should write in his name. Just make sure you spell it correctly.

I agree with Jon from San Mateo. Of course this was a joke and meant to be a goof. But it exposes an interesting flaw in the process. ANYONE who has the required number of signatures or pays the fee should be allowed on the state ballet.

Sounds like Edwards is just trying to win votes of people who like Stephen Colbert.

In response to Jon,

I think your comment is a bit incorrect. A party can pick who ever they choose as their candidate. However, the democratic part of this country is that anyone can run. Stephen can run anytime he wants in any political office, only that he cannot run as a Democrat.

A lawsuit would just be a waste of time and resources.

If the choice that I'm given is Hillary and Colbert against any of the current replublican candidates, I'd take Colbert in a heartbeat: a) he's not been raising up to $1MM/day!...raising the possibility that he'll not be plagued by promises made to be both sides of every issue;
b) he's sufficicently self-effacing to allow facts...and not political debts...to determine his conclusions.
c) he's a LOT more interesting than any of the current candidates.

Most importantly, as there's no reason to beleive that his candidancy is about to become active in any other states, I don;t see where his candidacy is SC is a threat to the democratic process in the other 49 states.

John Edwards has the right attitude: Colbert's candidacy can only lighten up, not diminish, the '98 election.

It might not be over:

http://www.ColbertforSouthCarolina.com

coz you are a joker too can not even win your state in 2004!

This is an absolute slap in the face to democracy. The whole story of this country is that if you want to run for office, you can. You don't need to have the approval of the politburo. While this was basically done for humor, that's really of no consequence. A citizen was denied the right to be placed on the ballot by a committee because they didn't happen to like him. If anything is a lawsuit, this should be. There is no excuse for this sort of behavior in this country.

Edward's campaign most likely was involved in squashing Colbert. He would have hurt Edwards in SC. It was a funny idea but its a god thing he is not running, it would have hurt the 2nd tier canidates by robbing them of votes from those dissatisfied with Hitllary as the nominee.

He would've beaten Edwards in SC...

They wouldn't put Colbert on the ballot?

What jerks.

Good break for you, John, now you have a shot at third place again.

If for no other reason, the SC Dems should have let Colbert on the ballot in order to increase interest among the young people of America who whould have been more interested than ever to engage in the policial electoral process to support someone they actually connected with.