Senator Gravel: Why I Wasn't Invited to the Debate on Gay Issues

Yesterday the Human Rights Campaign announced that it will not invite me to the first-ever presidential debate on gay issues because I didn't raise enough money. To say that I'm shocked is an understatement. I can confidently say, of all presidential candidates, I've been the most outspoken advocate for gay rights.

My record speaks for itself.

On Gay Marriage:

This week The Advocate praised me for being "unabashedly pro-gay marriage." But apparently this didn't matter to HRC, which invited Clinton, Edwards and Obama who all join George Bush in opposing marriage equality.

On Don't Ask:

Not only do I want to repeal Don't Ask, I wrote a Huffington Post lambasting Clinton for her refusal to call Don't Ask a mistake. No other candidate has dared to take on Hillary for her repeated whitewashing of Don't Ask as benign "transition policy." Let's be clear, Don't Ask was a cowardly political calculation that reaffirmed the military's unjust discharge policies. I have also challenged my fellow candidates to join me in publicly pledging that whoever gets elected, he or she will issue an apology on behalf of the federal government to the 100,000 gays and lesbians who were discharged by the military for their sexual orientation. No other candidate has joined me in that pledge.

On General Peter Pace:

Obama, Edwards and Clinton at first refused to denounce General Pace's statement that homosexuality is immoral. I immediately called for that homophobe's resignation. Hillary had to be repeatedly pressed before she finally conceded that homosexuality wasn't immoral. I told the press "love between a man and a man or a woman and a woman is beautiful."

On Gay Pride:

I proudly joined this year's San Francisco gay pride march and was the first major party presidential candidate to participate in a pride parade.

Why am I so committed to gay rights?

Fighting for a hated minority is a pretty dumb way to get elected president. And obviously it hasn't helped with my fundraising. But I want to live in a country where there are no second-class citizens. As long as our nation deprives gays and lesbians of basic rights, including marriage, we have not fulfilled the promise of the Declaration of Independence guaranteeing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to all Americans.

So why wasn't I invited to the gay rights forum?

According to a HRC spokesperson, I didn't raise enough money and therefore my candidacy did not meet their standard of "viability." But that's strange -- CNN, PBS, NBC and the NAACP invited me to their debates without evaluating my financial viability. Ironically I think the real reason why HRC didn't invite me is that I'm too vocal in my advocacy of gay rights. None of the top tier candidates would have been comfortable facing an opponent who consistently points out their refusal to embrace true equality for gays and lesbians. HRC simply bowed to the star factor. It's just a shame that this travesty was perpetrated in the name of the LGBT community. (Dennis, I'll be rootin' for ya.)

Yesterday I got an email from a grateful supporter who worried that this snub would make me bitter and less committed to gay rights. Far from it, in fact I'm going to rejoin the battle with even more determination to advance the gay rights discussion during the other debates. So stay tuned, because this old soldier has only just begun to fight.

Sen. Mike Gravel: Why I Wasn't Invited to the Debate on Gay Issues - Politics on The Huffington Post

Comments

Salute from Colombia

I'm a Colombian-born-and-raised gay university student living in Bogotá, the Nation's capital. I follow the US Presidential debate vigorously, profoundly convinced that the American decision turns into a global decision. No other candidate has ignited my faith in American Democracy like Sen. Gravel has... other than being politically in tone with him on progressive political standpoints, I also believe that it is a true democrat's duty to call a nation strongly uppon its issues. I profoundly regret this hineous decision from the HRC who has turned Human Rights and Civil Rights activism into corporate-like institutions and marketing frenzies, paving the way for the insertion of the LGBT community (if ever) into a profoundly damaged system with distorted values. I have true faith in the goodness of Sen. Gravel, for no other politician seems to lead a truthful marriage between politics-ethics, or strategy-conviction. THAT'S THE ONLY MARRIAGE WORTH VOTING FOR IN POLITICS. If anything, Sen. Gravel, you keep a flame of hope outside the borders for what I believe are the true American values, and the true American promise.

Camilo Vargas

Ps: Tell the HRC CEO to take some big campaign money and buy himself a conscience, and a tad of dignity if he can find it on discount.

Everyone call the HRC again!!

Alright everyone, I think it's time we be a little proactive now. We need to call/email the HRC and let them know that Mike deserves equal time in their forum, unlike what he got in the you tube debatcle. Let them know in advance that we will not tolerate that kind of crap and that if we were bad when they didn't invite him, if they ignore him it will be far worse. In fact, I say insist EVERYONE get equal time, including Mike, but don't just focus on Mike. When they all must speak the same amount of time, Mike will look all the better beside them.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- Benjamin Franklin

Vote for Mike Gravel, anything else would be insanity!

Finally someone outta to box!!!

 

I had a list of candidate names and as I watched the debate I scored each candidate. I was surprised that Sen. Gravel wasn't allowed much space to talk and I wanted to hear more from this man whom when given an oppertunity BLASTED the Democrat and Republican spin machines and brought forth the truth that it's all politics as ususal . I feel it's time for a change, Sen Gravel seems like the only person in the whole debate who stood out and on his own. All the others were eerily the same ol' same ol' as I have heard the past few decades. Gravel stood out like a beacon of light. What can I do to help get this non-conforming stand-alone elected!! Send me a yard  sign or something!!!

The only thing that bothers me is his position on gay rights. Being a Christian I think it's distastful to God as is any other sin. We all do it and we all have to answer to HIM on that final day. So , I am content to let HIM be the Judge. I don't intend to let this issue stand in the way of an otherwise quilified candidate .  Citizens- Lets Unite behind this one - of - a - kind. I'm curious to know who he will select as a running mate.

Wow, interesting.

That's a pretty good point there Rudy, It's not up to any of us to Judge, God can do it himself.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- Benjamin Franklin

Vote for Mike Gravel, anything else would be insanity!

Yes people, we are still in the dark ages.

Homosexual Immorality: What's the Debate? 7/20/2007

Washington, D.C. On August 9, MTV�s homosexual cable network, Logo, is hosting the first-ever presidential debate intended to promote the homosexual and transgender (gender identity disorder) lifestyles. All major presidential candidates have been invited to participate. To date, all Republican presidential candidates have declined, while all major Democratic candidates have accepted. Those candidates who have accepted are Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-New York), Sen. Barack Obama (D-Illinois), former Sen. John Edwards (D-North Carolina), Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut), former Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska), and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio).

Both Joe Solmonese, president of the homosexual Human Rights Campaign and lesbian singer/activist Melissa Etheridge have been selected as panelists.

Matt Barber, CWA's Policy Director for Cultural Issues, said, This debate is clearly designed to advance the radical homosexual agenda and to promote social and governmental acceptance and celebration of the high-risk and destructive homosexual lifestyle.

It's disgraceful that our nation�s moral standards have now dipped so low that it's considered tolerant to hold a debate organized entirely around the promotion of sexual immorality. What's next? Are presidential candidates going to be asked to participate in a debate on how to garner widespread acceptance of adultery or incest? Are members of the growing polygamy lobby and the pedophile group NAMBLA going to tap candidates for a televised debate to promote their chosen lifestyles?

Thousands of years of history, every major world religion, the unambiguous science of human biology and good old fashioned common sense have established that homosexual behaviors are both immoral and destructive to the lives, health and spiritual well being of those who choose to participate in those behaviors. For instance, the CDC has recently determined that 71 percent of all males living with deadly HIV/AIDS were infected with the disease through homosexual behaviors, said Barber, Furthermore, the CDC has determined that homosexuals especially males are by far at greatest risk for nearly all forms of sexually transmitted disease as well as other lifestyle related injuries.

Will any of the presidential candidates bring up any of these facts during the debate? Organizers are expecting them to fall all over themselves trying to prove to the world who�s most sympathetic to the left�s twisted version of tolerance� and diversity. But there's nothing to debate here. These candidates should play it straight, so to speak, and call it like it is. Immorality is immorality, concluded Barber.

http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=13486&department=MEDIA&categoryid=family

Obama = Politics As Usual

Check out the blog: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/bigmike

This blog reports on developments in the Gravel campaign and also keeps a running tab on the Politics As Usual, Do Nothing Dems such as Hillary and Obama.

is that an official obama

is that an official obama page? i dont get why he would allow so much obama bashing on his own page!

 

All i want is the truth, why is it so hard to find?

Obama the Usual Pol !

That's exactly what I was thinking. Is that Obama's Official Site?
Anyway, the site is good for us.
Obama go home and have a nice chat and a drink with all the rest of your friends, Hillary, Edwards and the rest!!!

LOL

They must not watch the blogs to see what people are saying.

I just read it...

I could edit it if I wanted, but such bigotry exposes it's own immorality.  I figure we should leave it.  He only shames himself and his bigoted cause.  If the gay community is offended by it, then we'll of course reconsider taking it down.  But only if it offends our gay friends.  -Eli

Innocent Man to be Executed Tomorrow?

Check out

http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=node/1699

Is there any chance that Senator Gravel could make a public statement about this sometime today? Maybe grab a news cameraman "by the scruff of the neck"?

Senator Gravel Opposed to the Execution of Troy Davis

Mike Gravel is opposed to the death penalty and calls for an end to the death penalty for all inmates on death row in America including Troy Davis.

Gravel 08

Telephone!

Call them relentlessly. From the posts on here, I have gotten the impression that the phone calls really helped in the HRC thing. Calls are harder to ignore or avoid. Let them know how we feel.

Contact: Steve Smith (202) 637-5018 (202) 412-4440 (cell)

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- Benjamin Franklin

Vote for Mike Gravel, anything else would be insanity!

AFL-CIO Blog on Mike Gravel

They have invited you now,

They have invited you now, but only in a piss poor fashion. My gut wants me to tell you not to go, since it's obvious they don't really care about the issues, just a nod they exist. Going would acknowledge their organizations as meaning something other than impotent shouting matches. While the community needs to be represented, I am not so certain that representation should be from groups who prize money over clear commitment to an issue.

It is your determination and strength of will that drew my interest and respect. You know what is right and what is wrong, and don't stand by waiting to see where the wind blows before standing for something. I admire you greatly and hope you will be elected president. You already have my vote.

To the AFL-CIO Debate??

Did they invite him to the AFL-CIO debate or you talking about the HRC debate??

HRC Debate.

HRC Debate.

Mike has not been invited to the aflcio debate

Mike has not been invited to the aflcio debate call them and complain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RE: Invitation

These people are soooo Lame!!!

RE: AFL/CIO

Thanks blueyes20 for the heads up. I just sent them a note. Here it is and I hope it's okay.
Sirs/Madams:
I am writing to voice my disappointment at the news that Sen. Mike was not invited to a debate to be held by you.
Please reconsider as I strongly feel that Sen. Gravel to be the only genuine candidate in the run. The others excepting maybe Rep. Kucinich are beholden to the miasmic corporate culture that hangs over Washington DC.
Thanks.Truly,
aquinas

Your Welcome

Wow you are a lot nicer that I was, I wasn't mean but I did tell them to invite him now to save themselves from any future embarassment!! But I would definatly go with what you got :)

Contact Info

I jut sent AFL-CIO a e-mail to complain  about Gravel not beening invited to yet another debate. I hope everyone will take the time to write them or call.

 http://www.aflcio.org/siteguides/contactus.cfm

Contact: Steve Smith

(202) 637-5018

(202) 412-4440 (cell)

Gravel being excluded from AFL-CIO debate

I just sent the AFL-CIO an email encouraging them to include Mr. Gravel .  Please keep on fighting Mike ...... we need you ! 

Another Forum Sen. Gravel was excluded from

According to this post, Senator Gravel was excluded from the AFL-CIO forums, as well. What a surprise.

http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=node/1406

AFLCIO's "lock out"

Rather strange, isn't it? A union who fights for the rights of workers who are locked out of their jobs by uncaring owners now locks out a serious presidential candidate who, should he be elected, would open up a whole new world to their cause.

I sent AFLCIO this email and will follow it with a phone call.

Others are encouraged to do so as well. Use the term "lock out". They're familiar.

---

I learn that the AFLCIO is sponsoring a debate among the current Democratic candidates for President. Unfortunately former Senator Mike Gravel is apparently not invited. Why not?

Such news is extremely disappointing.

My thought is that AFLCIO has forgotten how one person can make a difference. One worker started a movement to organize and protect workers. One experienced statesman in Mike Gravel has the background and a program of real change for our nation that will open opportunities for the kind of progress that AFLCIO and all the other unions fight for.

As one person who is very supportive and appreciative of our unions and recognizes that they are still very much needed, I find that your choice stings a bit.

Please seriously reconsider, if you will pardon the term, the "lock out" of Mike Gravel.


Mike invited to HRC Logo Debate

I recently received an email that because of the support Mike received barraging HRC and Logo, they reconsidered and invited Mike.

NICE WORK Y'ALL.   Now we just have to achieve that kind of tenacity for the National Election.

Gay Marriage

Forgive my disappointment, but Gravel's comment on the other candidate's opposition to gay marriage really suppressed my enthusiasm.  From what I read of his rhetoric, he sees the world in black and white (like a certain president who I think we all want to see out of office).  I entirely support equal rights for the GLBT community through civil unions, and as churches themselves choose, marriage.  Unfortunately, however, marriage is a religious institution, and if a church of that religion feels that gay marriage is not in accord with the teachings, that is their right.  It is America's duty to ensure that even if this is the church's stance, that there is a viable and equal option for members of the GLBT community.  Namely, that option is civil unions.  That is the stance many of Gravel's opponents take, and to state (or misstate) their views in ways that make them seem to denial civil unions is just as misleading as Bush's reasoning for getting us into Iraq.  I am extremely disappointed in Senator Gravel.

Marriage is definitely NOT a

Marriage is definitely NOT a religious institution. it was always about property. the church just likes to claim it belongs to them.

 

All i want is the truth, why is it so hard to find?

umm.... no.

Dude... State marriage licenses. It has NOTHING to do with the churches. You can go to your local justice of the peace and get married without ANY church involvement. In fact many people do. If it is up to the churches then Atheists Agnostics and the rest would not be allowed to get married either. ANYONE regardless of religious affiliation can get a marriage certificate as long as it is one man and one woman. Going to a church or getting church approval is the formality that doesn't really mean anything in the eyes of the law. Your church can say you are married all it wants but if you didn't follow the legal requirements you are NOT married in the eyes of the state. You can't get marriage benefits or anything else. Besides there are churches that approve of gay marriage and are happy to marry gays. Does that mean YOUR church has to approve? No. There are churches who don't approve of two people of different faiths being allowed to marry, but they are, so long as they are of opposing genders. Bottom line, in regards to Gay Marriage, the issue is ONLY concerned with the State/legal/government end of things. It has nothing to do with wither your church approves or not. Period. Although if it makes people happy maybe we can call the state end of things "Civil Unions" and EVERYONE, gay or straight gets that from the government and then applies to a church of their choice for a marriage certificate. But then as I said, some churches with marry gays, so they will still be allowed to marry.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- Benjamin Franklin

Vote for Mike Gravel, anything else would be insanity!

Thanks

I really appreciate the response to my post.  You're right, I had completely overlooked state marriage licenses--which is pretty inexplicable because I'm not even Christian!  In fact, after reading your post, I read up on the licenses themselves.  Marriages that are not conducted in a church are called civil unions, though (at least in my state), and therefore aren't marriages as such.  I guess that's where the confusion stemmed from. Thanks. 

Who sets the agenda

The right to marry in my state (Massachusetts) is considered one of our civil rights. Hence our state supreme court, finally, applied the Massachusetts state constitution to the issue and came down on the proper side of things. 1780 was not such a bad year and recent history was bettered when the state legislature was ordered to get off their ass and legalize same sex marriage.

Willard Mitt Romney's proclamation that "the institution of marriage has been between one man and one woman since the beginning of time" came to a needed end.

Since doing so I note that society is not breaking down here, despite the fearful bleating of various Haggardists (as I call them, in memory of their leader Ted Haggard, a sad liar, hypocrite and closeted gay). Our neighborhood, at my last count of those I know, has three gay couples all living within the same block. Marriages in the vicinity did not suddenly fall apart. In fact Massachusetts, gay marriage capital of the US, has the LOWEST per-capita divorce rate in the nation. The same statics show many of the republican-infested bible belt states to have some of the highest divorce rates. So perhaps this actually works in the opposite? More gays, less marital strife.

This issue, along with immigration, are in my view sideshows whose purpose is to deflect attention from the rather blatant and violent crimes of the current mal-administration. Neither of these issues is, I believe, all that critical to our survival. Look at where they are coming from. Look at who is setting the agenda.

Those who propose to reduce our freedoms, already provided for in our state constitution, failed to amend it in their favour just recently. The process, kicked off by an initiative (similar to Senator Gravel's hoped-for National Initiative) generated a lot of debate - mostly sparked by a well-financed minority religious crowd fed by right wing republicans. Here is one living case where protections against the will of a minority need to be incorporated into any initiative process, otherwise a bunch of Haggardists will turn America into a theocracy. If that happens, we'll be a movin'.

Mike Gravel is not an opportunist looking to aggrandize himself. I trust him at his word. So when he says that he is supportive to extend equal rights under our civil society to all, I believe it. He can, and should, take a stand on upholding the rights of religious practice AND - most importantly - the FIRM APPLICATION of the separation clause.

I can assure readers and his campaign that such a position will yield considerable interest in the growing community of concerned humanists in America who value our freedoms.

 

Romney's Statement is Nonsense

Romney's statement that "the institution of marriage has been between one man and one woman since the beginning of time" is rhetorical nonsense. Anybody who has taken Anthropology 101 knows this not true. Marriage takes on all kinds of forms throughout the world, both past and present. Some indiginous cultures in Africa, for example, allow same sex marriage. Polygyny, (i.e., one man, two or more wives), exists throughout many indiginous cultures throughout the world. Fraternal polyandry, (i.e., one woman, two or more husbands who are brothers), traditionally exists in some parts of Tibet. Even polygyandry (two or more men + two or more women)  has been reported in some cultures, though extremely rare.

Ironically, even the Old Testament of Romney's Bible clearly demonstrates that the early Hebrews were polygynous.

Somebody should call these politicians on their "one man - one woman" rhetoric. It's simply factually and historically inaccurate.

Romney is a Fraud

Someone should ask Willard Mitt when "the beginning of time" might be. He'll probably say 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.

How convenient of him to sidestep the sordid history of his church which was a polygamist haven up to and even a bit past the point where the practice was outlawed. They "reformed" only because they had to.

Glad to help..

Sorry if my rant is a bit angry. I just know people who base their votes on single issues(especially gay marriage), and it drives me mad. Most of them do not really even realize what the issue is truly about. Unfortunately most of them aren't willing to even consider reason because the fear of LGBT is so deeply ingrained in them.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- Benjamin Franklin

Vote for Mike Gravel, anything else would be insanity!

Invited.

He got invited thanks to all the phone calls, see the post here : http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=node/1671

 

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. -- Benjamin Franklin

Vote for Mike Gravel, anything else would be insanity!

RE: HRC

I just called HRC and someone was very polite and it seems as if all the calls are making an impact. I think that the wheels are coming off Politics as Usual and we are just seeing the begining of the exposure of the hypocrites!
Sen. Gravel is about to put HRC out of business!
Go President Gravel2008!!!

sign the petition and send it to your friends!!!

hey all

check out this petition

help support freedom of speech and ideas and say no to monetary debates

"INVITE MIKE GRAVEL TO THE LOGO/HRC FOUNDATION PRESIDENTIAL FIRUM"
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Mike_Gravel?e

go mike go and help the campaign by sending them a contribution or call the human rights campaign @ 202 628 4160 or fax them @ 202 347 5323 and tell them to put human rights back into the human rights campaign

 

Leadership convention

Has Senator Gravel received an invitation or applied to participate in the YearlyKOS leadership convention?

http://www.yearlykosconvention.org/

He is not mentioned among the candidates that will participate.

Yes. Senator Gravel has been invited and will be in attendance.

Thank you YearlyKos! 

Gravel 08

That's great news!

Kos has "attacked" Gravel before so I'm surprised he's invited but it's good news that Kos is putting aside his personal views and inviting him.  :D Thanks to Kos!

Apparently, he has

Apparently, he has indeed been invited. This is according to an e-mail response I got:

My understanding is that Gravel has already been invited.
Thanks for your inquiry -- and I look forward to seeing you at the convention.
Jon



huffington-get it out there on Reddit

help me get it out there on Reddit.com

Get the word out on Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfJyqJw4cVo&NR=1

This is a link to a guy that is questioning the decision of the HRC to leave out Mike. He makes a bunch of great points and we need to make more of these videos. GO GRAVEL

One Fag Who Still Loves Mike

I am an impoverished, debt-saddled, over-educated, underemployed twenty-something lost in the wilderness of the retail & service economy. As such, my resentment towards business as usual is acute, and I embraced Mike's candidacy as soon as I heard him in the first debate. When Mike came out of the gate firing at the Military-Industrial(-Congressional) Complex, I knew it was time to abandon Dennis for Mike. I reckon Gravel is the only sane candidate in this race and the only honest one, save Dennis. As an anarcho-socialist, Mike's National Initiative proposal made me wiggle my toes with glee. I, like so many other Americans, welcome Mike as a rare gasp of fresh air in a political atmosphere which is stale and noxious.

Aside from why I support Mike, I am also gay. While the rights of me and mine are of great importance to me, I think of gay rights as yet another political issue, like immigration, the right to choice, or Africa. While every specific set of policies is relevant because it determines the futures of many people, the wonderful thing about Mike is that he cuts to the core of the issue. The Empire and Capital are the roots of much of the suffering in this world. Until we raze the Pentagon, no one on this Earth shall be free.

So, why all this prattle? I wish to draw a bright line between us and our purported leaders. The HRC is yet another pandering, moneyed, self-propagating NGO whose first interest is itself. I am ashamed to admit that a disproportionately large number of my fellow gay folk are endowed with material wealth, wealth which translates swiftly into lobbying power. I am loathe to admit that our organizations are as corrupted by money and lawyerly ways as those of any other minority group. The real lesson is that K Street and Wall Street must be subjugated to the will of the people. Just because we fags have operators on K Street who nominally represent us does not mean that we are part of the evil. We are freedom fighters in our own way. Remember that we all had to, often alone, free ourselves from the shackles of our society. Even being born in the waning months of the Carter Administration, I know what it is to be the Other, despite being a white, native-born American.

As a cynic, convinced that we have already committed mass suicide on a species level, I want to hope against the data that Mike is right that he will be the next President of the United States. If those who purport to represent me cannot free themselves from the horse race propagated by the Imperial media (the ultimate beneficiary of all those campaign funds), then I damn them the same as all the other panderers who serve the Empire. Any member of the LGBT community who opposes Gravel is either a crassly bribed toady of power or sublimely ignorant of what liberty and justice mean.

Maybe Hillary & Edwards had a part in Mike not going to HRC

This is a rather interesting conversation betwween Hillary and Edwards after the NAACP debate. Perhaps they should consider stepping a little bit further away from the microphones the next time they're talking about having "a more serious and smaller group" since some of the candidates "are just being trivialized" and "not serious".

Perhaps there should be more "effort by [their] campaigns to do that" and not get "detoured". Perhaps they've "gotta get back to it" and perhaps "that's all [they're] going to do between now and [the Fall]" Perhaps their "guys should talk".

Check it out, starting at about 1:45 in the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKbv5Wj_bzM

That really made me mad

I was surprised by Edwards but not Clinton.  The election is a year or so away!  At this time in 2003 John Kerry was a total nobody and was low in the polls and this time in 1991 Clinton had a rating of one percent but yet both of them campaigned hard and ended up getting the nomination.  It's really arrogant to crown yourself.  Let the people decide and if one of them wins the nomination than so be it but until than they are no better than anyone else.

Is there any footage of

Is there any footage of Gravel speaking at that forum? I hope he got equal time, and if he didn't....we got to do what we Gravel supporters do.

Oh, and boo Fox for making Gravel look like a bad guy.

No doubt Clinton has something to do w/ Gravel not being invited

Clinton: "No- you know I...I...I think there was an effort by our campaigns to do that, it got..it got somehow..detoured We gotta get back to it...because that is all we're going to do between now and them is that...thanks. Barack. So..we..us..thanks, Dennis...our guys should talk."

I don't know about that but it seems

Gravel has now been invited and will be going.  The whole issue of Clinton/Edwards issue it appears they were supposivley talking about having smaller debates.  If you watch the video at the ABC link at fifteen seconds you can hear Clinton say the word "debates" so I really don't know.