I'm pretty sure WRGZ will only get one to five percent of the viewership for that time slot anyway, so what is with dissing Ian Murphy for polling at 1%? If he is a joke then so is WRGZ. However, I predict Ian Murphy will get around 3% and have a very mighty impact on this four way race. I'll be sure to tell you I told you so if it turns out I am right. WRGZ should be ashamed of itself for turning off the viewership and the man responsible should be fired. Ian would have kept people interested in what is sure to be a sound bite status quo non debate, debate. And that orange color? Spray on tan, John Boneher has a lifetime all you can spray membership to the same salon.

"Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media." -Noam Chomsky Duh! How dumb.

"Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." -Noam Chomsky I didn't even know he knew Ian. Boy, do I feel dumb.

While Ian Murphy may not have big numbers in the polls, he does come to the table with big ideas and opinions that are well thoughtout and worthwhile to include in the debate.

Speaking of John Bohner, note the correct spelling George, his skin color is weird, like he uses that QT lotion from the '60s and doesn't know when to stop. I would never have thought that if someone said "Boo!" to him he would burst into tears. That's even weirder. Nice eyes though.

John Andrew Boehner is the 61st and current Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. (wikipedia) Not that I care if George or anyone else makes fun of his name, but that is the correct spelling. It really makes me angry, as it should everyone, that a tv station wants to only broadcast the candidates in a debate which it feels are viable. Ian Murphy is a properly endorsed candidate by the Green Party who has won an automatic ballot spot by exceeding the 50,000 gubernatorial vote threshold required by NY's stupid ballot access law. He should be heard, the people of the 26th district have the right to hear his views. WGRZ is most likely only concerned about letters and e-mails by people who don't like Murphy and the resultant possible pullback by some advertisers. Hey WGRZ and Jeff Woodard, I got a well-used and notorious The Batavian comment for you: "Grow A Pair".

I think Ian ought to be included as well but here is what else I think. I disagree with many of Ian's platforms and will not be voting for him(write-in David Bellavia) but Ian brings to this race exactly what it and many other races need, no political B.S. Now I don't condone in any way some of Ian's tactics and writings, but as far as his answers to the questions posed by Howard, he has offered the most well thought out, genuine responses of all the candidates. All we get from the others are generic, pre-packaged political pablum and partisan bickering where all one has to do is change the name to recycle it for the next election. I truly believe that Ian forces some accountability in the others and that is good. So my advice to you Ian is this...you are asking to sit at a big table, even if it is at a restaurant where you detest the food, sometimes the place requires a coat and tie. You will only have influence if you tone down the anti-establishment bit, put on a coat and tie, and bring your ideas to the table. Besides, WGRZ probably feels they would have to hire 3 extra people just to run the censor buttons.

The media should not be deciding who is a "serious" candidate and who is not. He's on the ballot, he should be included.

It's interesting to see who didn't comment on this story, as compared to the people that comment on the Hochul & Corwin ads.

I don't blame Jack for wanting Ian Murphy in the debate. Ian Murphy says so much crazy crap he makes Jack seem normal. One "F the troops" rant and Jack could say anything he wants about the Mexicans without even getting a negetive headline. By the way, I would pay to watch a debate with Murphy and Davis. I would pop two bags of corn for that one.

Murphy should be allowed to be there. When they had the debate for Governor, there were a few who we all knew had no chance to win (The rent is too damn high), but they were legally on the ballot. If they could be on the stage for the governors race, Murphy should be on the stage for Congress.

Murphy has a line from a legally constituted political party in teh State of New York. Let him in. He'll make Corwin look stupid, and I'm all for that.

Having Ian Murphy included in the debate does not automatically turn it into a side show, I would be interested in hearing more from him. The "professional' media are still raw at his success at getting Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker on the phone and exposing his true agenda and his fawning responses to a voice on the line he thought was one of the Koch brothers. Granted it was a stunt, but the result was the validation of the notion that Republican's are for sale or at least rent to the highest bidder when it comes to a far right reactionary agenda. I must admit to admiring Murphy's asymetric approach to getting his message out with satire and humor to get attention. Jack Davis and Kathy Hochul have no objection to having Ian Murphy included in the debates because it is the right thing to do, issues should be debated and no one should be excluded beacause they have opinions that aren't in agreement with the leaders of either the Democratic or Republican parties. If some news director has an issue of comments made by any candidate regarding remarks made by the candidate about how an invitation was issued he needs to be clued in to the fact that its not all about him and his fragile ego. The debate is a news event and all of the candidates on the ballot should be given the opportunity to debate the issues. Ian Murphy is the candidate of a recognized political party just as the Republican and Democratic parties are.

"Murphy was originally included, but the invitation was pulled after News Director Jeff Woodard took offense to an item Murphy wrote about how his invitation was handled in the first place." The only thing worse for democracy than partisan politics, is personal politics. Ian Murphy is a bona fide candidate and he should be allowed to participate in the debate.

There is no denying that Ian Murphy is a 'bona fide' candidate; he has been endorsed by a 'bona fide' NYS political party. Granted he champions a slim slice of the WNY political pie and begs a Herculean software glitch to manufacture a win. Regardless of remoteness- his chance of winning should not preclude him from any debate. His choice to parody status-quo politicians neither diminishes his legitimacy as a candidate nor does it lessen his value in political discussion. On the contrary- his presence will likely elevate the dialog beyond the programmed Pablum we might otherwise expect.