Well, the video is not great, but the sound came through fairly well. This clip is of the two minutes the League of Women Voters would have us and you believe was generously given to Patrick–an offer that, one member told Patrick, the League, a non-partisan group, weren’t obligated to give. Well they were not. But if the League’s main aim and message is the spread of democracy to all the voiceless corners of society, their restrictions on Patrick’s speech in last night’s Phillips Academy debate are certainly not consistent with that goal. Since Patrick’s first speech in Acton, a speech that was unabashed in pointing to flaws in the League’s logic, we’ve had several conversations with members that were concerned we misunderstood the purpose of their debates. They assured us we would be given full time after the primary. We understood that well. We understand well, also, that inclusion later does not justify exclusion now. It’s a “tacit ratification” of the party system, and of two, non-public entities that together do not even hold a majority in this district. It creates a bias in the minds of those that attended, and those that have followed the debate and the race, that there is something peculiar, different, minor, about the candidates who were not able to speak. Well there is something different about Patrick, and it’s not a minor thing, it’s substantial, and I’m afraid it’ll be missed if organizations like the League misunderstand what turns the cogs of democracy–the speech of all its people.

The clip may be found on [1] youtube.com.