No matter what side of the issue you are on I think we can agree that an organization who would attempt to avoid legal service is not one that should be hosting debates, no matter who funds them or who is in them.
If something legitimate was done in a timely manner to serve papers, I agree with you. If CPD just does not want to have their debate screwed up at the last minute by intruders more interested in making a public commotion than serving papers to start a legal process, then I can see why they would not go out of their way to accommodate the drama queens.
It sounds like you know more about what happened, however, and if what I said is wrong I would like to know.
Yes, the very nature of the two party debates is. . . um. . .
how you say. . ..
ONE sided!!!???!!!
I agree -- but you have to understand, all that these idiots have to do is change the venue to another state --- and the problem goes away for them.
Thanks for posting this ... we don't get much news about the Libertarian Party.
Not only the host's funding, but the whole process is partially funded from INCOME TAXES - THE 1040 PRESIDENTAIL ELECTION FUND check-off! (of which only 11% of Income Tax filers say YES. That is why the Congress overwhelmingly voted in 1993 to increase the check-off to $3!)
More proof libertarians are no different than the liberals. They even have their own activist judges just like the libbies.
So what happened in the hearing, judge listened, laughed himself out of his robes and went home?
These "debates"........................
TV shows, nothing accomplished, entertainment for the masses.
What debate? [/sarcasm]