Comedic Discriminaton? (Blog Stage Five- Original Article)

Stephen Colbert was planning to run as a democratic candidate for the 2008 presidential election. According to CNN's article published November 1, 2007, candidates must demonstrate two requirements to get on the ballot: that he or she is viable nationally and has spent time campaigning in the state. Chairwoman of the state Democratic Party, Carol Fowler, and a member of the executive council stated that Colbert did not meet the requirement of national viability. The South Carolina Democratic Party voted to keep Colbert's name off the Democratic Primary ballot.

So, should Stephen Colbert be allowed to run for president? If Marc Katz can run for mayor, and Arnold Schwarzenegger can run for governor, why can't a political based comedian run for president? The hope is that our system is advanced enough that if Stephen Colbert is not qualified he would never make it as the primary, let alone into office.

What does "viable nationally" mean? Viable has numerous definitions, most of them including "capable of living," but I am going to go with "having the ability to grow, expand, develop, etc." (dictionary.com). How can a group of individuals decide one's viability? Don't we all have the ability to grow, expand and develop if we so desire?

So, it is not that I think that Stephen Colbert should be the next President of the United States, but I do believe that he should have the ability to be on the primary ballot. It is not that I think that Stephen Colbert running for president would not make a mockery of our political process, but it seems that if he is able to provide the necessary requirements to be a candidate, he should have that ability.