WP: Backlash Envelops Nader Before He's in Race

[kskiska]

Ralph Nader has not announced whether he will run again for president -- he'll do that this morning on NBC's "Meet the Press" -- but the backlash is already underway.

On the Internet, in newspapers and magazines, erstwhile supporters have been urging the former Green Party presidential candidate to forgo this year's race -- all in the hope of aiding the Democratic presidential nominee.

"For the good of the country, the many causes you've championed and for your own good name -- don't run for president this year," the editors of the lefty magazine The Nation wrote in an open letter to the longtime consumer advocate.

A Web site appropriately called RalphDontRun.net, operated by one-time Nader supporter John Pearce, has been urging anyone who will pay attention to call or e-mail Nader's exploratory committee: "Politely, but urgently ask Ralph NOT TO RUN in 2004," the site urges.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61124-2004Feb21.html

[mstrsplinter326]

1. It's a sad day

when we see someone who stands for most of the issues we know to be right get stamped out. We know he's right on the environment, labor, taxation, gun control, military, consumerism, abortion, diplomacy, and yet we seek to attack the one party willing to put it's votes where it's mouth is.

[WitchWay]

2. very sad...

It seems all those candidates who somehow seem to be on the right (non-corporate) side of everything seem to suffer from "political" assasination before they even have a fair chance at debate.

The media is corporate run, and the candidate they put out as the "mainstream" candidate will always be the candidate most cozy with corporate interests. The most mainstream candidates tend to be the least trustworthy.

I have noticed so many people on this board who already seem so disenfranchised by this system, and no wonder! We need fair and real Debates, fair Elections (with exit polls to keep them in check, and paper trails), fair polls, and fair access to information, just for starters.

[sendero]

29. Nader...

... has sabotaged his own message by his despicable actions in the 2000 elections. Nobody gives a rat's ass what he has to say any more, and even though I agree with much of his message, my complete and utter lack of respect for him as a person renders that moot.

[mstrsplinter326]

34. if nobody cares...

Then why waste time bashing; why fear?

[smb]

102. What "Despicable" Actions?

Like it or not, Nader has as much right to run, and to receive votes, as any other native-born citizen who has reached the age of thirty-five. The only vote that "belongs" to Kerry (or Edwards or whoever the Dems nominate) as a matter of right is the one he will cast in his hometown polling place.

[roscoeroscoe]

3. no offense, but,

i know you've heard all the arguments before. what the heck, if you like ideals, read plato! :) we've got to get rid of bush. shut up and sit down ralph, unless you want to do something useful like REGESTER DEMOCRATIC VOTERS!!
thank you very much~

[leftchick]

15. Well said roscoe.....

Welcome to DU :toast:

[radfringe]

16. If I've said it once, I've said it a gazillion times

It's the right message -- but nader is the wrong messenger

and as far as I'm concerned.. a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush

[Carolina]

26. totally agree

Ralph is now only about Ralph; he truly is the worst messenger and he ain't so squeaky clean either.

Take your ball and go home, Ralph.

[belle]

101. "Show, don't tell."

[0007]

17. That's the remedy ~

[saigon68]

28. Thanks Ralph

for nothing

[Melodybe]

4. Whatever, Kerry/Edwards 2004=status quo, Bush* 2004=nazi USA

The end! Things have gotten so out of whack that a return to the politics of Clinton will be a welcome change. We have to get this administration away from the big red button! Kerry/Edwards as president will not lead this country into a scary 1984 nightmare. That is enough for this FORMER Nader voter to tell Nader himself to shove his presidential bid in 2004 up his ass. If Nader truely cared about Americans, he would be supporting whoever the Dem is. Dean knows what is at stake, I know what is at stake. Go re-read 1984, Animal Farm, A Handmaid's Tale, and Farenheit 451, this administration is using those books as a god damn "how to" guide. THAT IS WHAT IS AT STAKE HERE! Please, for the love of god, coming from a non-religious mother of 2 baby boys, tell Nader not to run.

[mstrsplinter326]

5. its all so true...

but what'll be the excuse not to move further left after we take 2004? Will kerry run unapposed in 2k8?

I'm not dumb, bush has got to go, but I can't vote for someone I don't believe in. Would you?

[fearnobush]

10. This looks like a Rove plant.

[PennyLane]

85. Yep!

It does indeed.

[tkmorris]

11. Yes I can

If the choice is between Mussolini and PeeWee Herman you bet your ass I can choose. It doesn't mean I like the man it means I recognize the difference between evil incarnate and a dork.

[mstrsplinter326]

33. Undoubtedly

I wouldn't vote for Mussolini; no US presidential race is ever between two people. I understand the want to oust bush. I'm pointing out that those who staunchly support Kerry wouldn't vote for Nader, vice-versa

[tkmorris]

51. Not that simple

A vote for Nader is a statement, nothing more. Now it can be argued that it is a statement that needs to be made but statement it is. He cannot win. That is the salient point here, he cannot win.

Anyone whose concern is not to send a message but rather to actually influence who will be president has exactly two choices. No more, no less. I wish it were not so but it is. I don't believe this is a good time to "send a message" to the Democratic Party nor to anyone else. Now is the time to get rid of Bush. Period, end of story. To me anyway. You should do whatever you feel is best.

[CBHagman]

52. Well said, tkmorris.

Nader can't tell me he supports my goals of getting rid of Bush and then turn around and tell me I'm no different from the GOP and besides, 2000 wasn't his fault. No, we've done the math, we've seen the difference, and we know that four more years of Bush means, quite simply, literally extra decades of work to get this country turned around.

Nader is like a man who says he wants a garden but won't buy seed, pull weeds, or irrigate.

Nader is like a knight who says he wants to protect and honor his lady, and then denounces said lady as a whore and turns her over to be gang-raped.

Nader is like a fat man who says he wants to lose weight but then sits on his butt and stuffs chocolate bars down his throat.

Nader's "strategy" plays into the hands of those who divide the progressives and the moderates. He's either a fool or a toady, and I'm undecided as to which he is.

[mstrsplinter326]

68. Nader's a what??

the equivalent of someone who condones and sets up rape? that's beyond the realm of political, that's a personal attack. You sound like the repukkks I know.

More importantly, dividing of the progressives and moderates??? The progressives should have their own party (the dems of 50+ years ago) and the moderates should be the fence riders who sway the elections. That's the way it should work. Should.
The moderates and right-leaning moderates now have a party in the current dem's. That's not the way it should be, that's what Naderites understand. We don't like Bush anymore than you do, but we understand that if we allow the dems to be right of center in one election, whats to stop them from trying the same bull in every election. What to stop the 'better than the other guy' argument?? When does it end. Of course bush is bad, but Kerry is only slightly better. Why isn't there a good candidate. And I don't want to hear the no one would elect a progressive like DK. That's crap. No one knows the truths about the current state of the union, and if they did they'd go running to Dennis.

[donco6]

82. Ergo, we're all ignorant because we're not running to DK?

Baloney.

What a bunch of elitist garbage. Such holier-than-thou epithets are unworthy of this board.

[mstrsplinter326]

86. Elitism

Having or not having information has nothing to do with elitism.

[donco6]

90. Ha!

"No one knows the truths about the current state of the union, and if they did they'd go running to Dennis."

Textbook definition.

No one (but you, I suppose) knows the truths about the current state of the union, . . . this is classic elitism and you know it. Stop dodging your own words. If you're going to insult people, at least have the courage to face your own comments.

[mstrsplinter326]

93. Generalizations

It's easy for all of us, including me, to use phrases like all, every, etc. Of course no one has surveyed the world to see how everyone feels. When we use terms like 'all' and 'every' I generally mean a majority, a general census, or the dominate idea or group. Many people know some truth, otherwise sites like this wouldn't exist. Few tend to connect the dots to realize big picture ideas, mostly because few people have access to the kind of information necessary to asses the situation the gov't and controlling political forces are in. I never said I know whole truth, all truth, most truth, many truths, etc. When we look back 60 years from now with a view point mostly free of opinion, <i>I believe </i>many of us will realize the that current front runner democrats of 2004 are not liberal. And we will realize that the American political system is based on a at least a quasi-balance between political parties.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

96. Why aren't you people as smart as me?

If you were, then you'd all see it my way.

What insufferable arrogance.

[donco6]

55. Amen eom

[Zero Gravitas]

74. The only message sent

is that Nader's enablers would rather see Bush re-elected than vote Democratic.

There is no way that the Democratic party is going to loose 5 or 10% of voters in the middle to pick up 1-2% of Naderites on the left. Sorry message heard, understood and rejected. If they don't like it they should go out and organize a party in the grass roots and build it up to the point where they could field a viable third party candidate.

With the right wing lunatics now laying waste to our country now is not the time for posing and futile gestures IMO. Like Chimpy said you're either with us, or you're for Bush. It appears that Nader and anyone who votes for him is for Bush.

[Blue_Roses]

22. ditto

"I can't vote for someone I don't believe in" and that's why Ralph Nader will NEVER get my vote

[mstrsplinter326]

31. thank you

You just made my point for me. You wouldn't vote for Nader because you don't believe in what he stands for and how he would govern. I struggle to vote for the kerry/edwards/dean/clark group for the same reason.

[snippy]

24. "I can't vote for someone I don't believe in. Would you?" Of course.

In my lifetime I have voted for hundreds, maybe thousands, of candidates I did not believe in. I will continue to do so because I am not an idiot.

[TreasonousBastard]

25. Sure...

I do it every year.

Politics isn't a religion-- sometimes you do have to go for the lesser evil.

[mstrsplinter326]

30. reasoning

That's reasoning that got the dem's to the rightwing position we are in now.

[TreasonousBastard]

84. Hardly.

Through much of its history the Democratic Party was split between Dixiecrats and urban machines. Neither would be called "liberal." Nor did either of them have much in common. I doubt such luminous Democrats as William Jennings Bryan would find much of a place in today's party.

After T. Roosevelt lost in his attempt to stop the Republicans from swinging hard right, the Democrats had little else to do but swing to the left when they could. The party of labor unions, Communists, segregationists... Couldn't get the Presidency until we had a Depression and everyone got sick of Republicans.

Kinda interesting that we Democrats didn't have a two-term President for a long time until Clinton grabbed the center away from the Republicans. That now hated DLC did notice that a leftie can't get elected in this country any more and were hailed as the saviors of the party for a while, at least while they were actually getting people elected.

We're still in a spot where the country will generally go for a centrist or conservative. There are very few areas where a liberal has a chance. We can scream all we want to about the press, the DLC, DINO's and all the other whining and excuse-making, but the fact remains that the public doesn't buy left-wing candidates, and they lose elections.

And, it is a democracy, isn't it? People vote for who they want to vote for. Run someone they don't want, and he will lose.

[koopie57]

43. I think

a vote for Nader will in essence be a vote for Bush, so in fact you are voting for someone you don't believe in. Ideals are wonderful, but a very simple way to live in todays world. Ideally there would be world peace, everyone would have a job, a place to live, healthy food to eat; but that is not the way it is. There is a time to live on Cloud 9 and then there is a time to put on the shit kickers and get out there and make a difference using what we have at our disposal right now.

[mstrsplinter326]

69. that's simply not true

See "Nader's a what"

[koopie57]

80. I don't see your point

and you seem too self-absorbed to listen to others and hear what they are saying. You seem to listen only with an intent of rebutting. Vote how you want which is your right, but I can't imagine what good it will do. We need to get bush out of the white house soon, either help or get out of the way and do your own thing, just don't drag us back with you. We don't have time nor energy to waste to bother with ideals and dreams of a perfect world this time around. It is far too dangerous and serious today. We lost a large part of this generation's young people and I will not pussyfoot and dream and wish until I do what I can to make sure it stops soon.

[mstrsplinter326]

88. "don't have time to bother with ideals and dreams"

"We don't have time nor energy to waste to bother with ideals and dreams of a perfect world"

Wow. What was it that made you give up on the things you believed in? To me, this attitude explains why the dem.s were allowed to try to assimilate Republican ideals, leaving their status as the champion of the working class behind.

What defines a large portion of our young people? 5%? It's the republicans who have stolen the youth - focus your energies there and the rest will fall into place.

As far as dragging you down. I live in Indiana - a state that votes 75% for republican presidents. It will not make a difference if I vote for Kerry. I couldn't help you if I wanted to.

[koopie57]

97. you got it right

if we want to dream again we need to get real for the moment. I have not given up on things I believe in, that is why I'm fighting now cuz one of my dreams is not to have my son get his limbs blown off for Bush.

And you really don't make much sense. You were not quite so ignorant as most of those who visit here to cause trouble, so I thought it might be interesting, but nonetheless you manage to only make as much sense as they do when all is said and done.

[mstrsplinter326]

98. Personal Attacks...

really look good in posts; keep rolling them out.

I'm glad to hear your voting for what you believe, because then you'll understand when I vote for what I believe in.

[koopie57]

100. cool

how about this personal attack .... blow it out your ass why don't you!!! And I know you will respond to that in some arrogant ignorant way without sustance or original thought. And then you can just presume that I'm thinking...ahh blow it out your big fat ass. And then presume that I'm thinking ...ahh blow it out your big fat ugly ass. *LOL*..... It has been fun, but I'm tired of you now. You are too predictable.

[mstrsplinter326]

104. "Sustance" or original thought

"blow it out your ass why don't you!!!"

Mind blowing, totally original, but most importantly, you make a great argument. I really liked the mature tone to your post and the repetition of powerful, thought-provoking words, like 'ass'. It really makes you sound well-educated, and politically savvy.

PS. "Sustance" is not a word. I believe you wanted Substance.

[donco6]

53. You've painted yourself into a box

Be logical:

"Bush has got to go"

and

"I can't vote for someone I don't believe in."

If by "believe in" you mean agree with on every point, then you're pretty much screwed. There's NO candidate who espouses everything I believe in, either. But that ain't gonna stop me from electing a Dem over Bush.

As for you, you can't vote for Bush and you can't vote for anyone else. Kinda pointless, dontcha think?

[mstrsplinter326]

70. if there were such a candidate

I'd vote for him. If someone agrees with a candidate on every aspect of life, then there is something wrong with them. 'Believe in' means that they will work for the rights of the people. 'Believe in' means that big business is lower than you and I on their political priorities list. If the candidate you support you don't or can't believe in, then you're pretty much screwed.

As for the pointless comment - "If voting made a difference it would be illegal" I don't believe in it, but it's an interesting and very palpable feeling, considering that the same corp.s that support the repukkks are the same corp.s that support the main-stream dems, just to a lesser extent.

The optimum situation at this point would be to elect Kerry, but remind him everyday that he only is there because he's the lesser of two evils, but nonetheless evil. I won't vote for him though, because in Indiana it doesn't matter who I vote for. Bush will take the state unless Sen. Evan Bayh would be named VP.

[donco6]

81. Odd

On the one hand, your post is full of pie-in-the-sky claptrap ('Believe in' means that they will work for the rights of the people. 'Believe in' means that big business is lower than you and I on their political priorities list" - ha! Yeah, right, as if that has EVER happened from the beginning of political history, anywhere, anytime.), and then you end with this alarmingly pragmatic scenario:

"The optimum situation at this point would be to elect Kerry, but remind him everyday that he only is there because he's the lesser of two evils, but nonetheless evil. I won't vote for him though, because in Indiana it doesn't matter who I vote for. Bush will take the state unless Sen. Evan Bayh would be named VP."

Evil? You really think Kerry is evil? Because he has to work with corporations? I think that's ridiculous.

[mstrsplinter326]

87. not quite

evil because he thinks troops in iraq was a good idea
evil because he thinks the Patriot act could be good for America
of course I don't actually believe he is evil!! That's a really strong word. (I was borrowing from Michael Moore to make my point with a term he used to decribe 'Gore v. Bush.') Nonetheless he's not a liberal canidate. I am a liberal. Henseforth, I don't like him. I think I am alowed to be liberal and expect, in a two party system, that one of the two parties would offer at least a liberal lean canidate. (Please don't try to tell me Kerry is liberal. It's commonly known among political scietists that the front runners for the Dem. nomination are not left of the middle.)
There are politicians who have done what was right for the people in the face of the powers that be. They're the great ones. It has happened before. Is it so much to ask that the President of the United States be a great person? Kerry has some strong points. There's no absolutes as we all like to believe there are. (including me, no 'elitism' here)

[donco6]

91. Maybe you just need to think before you write.

"of course I don't actually believe he is evil!! That's a really strong word."

and in your previous post:

"The optimum situation at this point would be to elect Kerry, but remind him everyday that he only is there because he's the lesser of two evils, but nonetheless evil."

So which one is it? You really should make up your mind.

[mstrsplinter326]

94. Let me rephrase...

It's a slippery slope to pick on the syntax of language rather than the crux of arguments. Let's not turn this into personal attacking or grammar checking.

Nonetheless, I said I don't actually hate, I was borrowing from the Lesser of Two Evils phrase of the 2000 election. Some of Kerry's arguments are, in my opinion bad. Bad is a weaker synonym of evil. I used bad, thinking that one could focus on my points more than my use of adjectives. I do think before I post, don't attack my intelligence, attack my ideas.

[Zero Gravitas]

73. Yes of course

BUSH HAS GOT TO GO. The stakes are too high to leave that murderous lying bastard in power. Kerry is not my first choice but there is no way I am gong to play holier-than thou and not vote for the only person who has a chance of saving our country from these right wing lunatics.

If you really want a third party go out and build one. But don't start whining once ever four years that you don't like the choices on the balot. There's no point running an independent candidate until you've built up a nationwide movement thats going go and do the grass roots organization necessary to support a viable candidate. If you really want change go out and get involved and make it happen from the ground up.

But no the Nader Enablers want to have it handed to them on a plate without putting in any effort. Look at the GOP it was changed from the inside out by the fundies. If you want to transform the Democratic party go and do the same thing.

[mstrsplinter326]

95. It's saddening to see that third parties will never be of signifigance...

when many Americans think that, before working to promote third party causes, the third party must be established and strong. It's a catch 22 that would forever keep the two party's monopoly on power no matter what. I am involved, and I will continue to be involved but thank you. I agree that the third parties become popular because of ground swell support. But I think the niche candidates also have a place in American politics. I don't think a third party must be popular or widely accepted to qualify it as worth voting for. People should vote their beliefs not whats popular.

"There's no point running an independent candidate until you've built up a nationwide movement..."
What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right.

[TreasonousBastard]

19. Things have gotten so out of whack that...

a return to the policies of Reagan would be a welcome change.

(Did I really say that?)

[Art_from_Ark]

23. You know things have gotten out of hand when you say

"a return to the policies of Reagan would be a welcome change."

[Blue_Roses]

20. if he's so right on everything

then why did he lose so bad in '96 and 2000? If Ralph Nader wants to be a "champion" on the issues, then why is he not speaking out on jobs, outsourcing, health care, social security, and the list goes on.


It's not about whether he believes in or thinks he's right on the "environment, labor, taxation, gun control, military, consumerism,abortion, blah, blah, blah, it's his ability to speak CONSISTENLY about those issues and work towards a plan to implementing them. I think Ralph Nader would be a horrible President, because he seems like an opportunistic person who only thinks of using his own agenda when it serves HIS purpose, not the purpose of the American people.

THAT'S WHY he doesn't get the support ...

[mstrsplinter326]

71. all you have to do is read the party platform...

it would clear up all your woes. the reason he is not supported is because the people believe one of the two parties will come through for them and champion their causes, and they will some how benefit. It's too bad that belief has been totally misplaced so far. When will a candidate step up from the Dem party and champion the people. Dare to be LEFT! What a radical notion. The repukkks don't have a problem supporting their side of the spectrum. The dem's used to know what it's like to be left, but they decided a while back, if you can't beat them, join them. Only after 2000 did that trend change. Why? Nader and defeat.

[Zero Gravitas]

75. Bullshit

Its changing because Bush is a total disaster and the most radical right wing president this country has ever seen. Any changes in the Dem party have nothing to do with Nader. If you don't like the Democratic Party go form your own party. But quit whining here.

[mstrsplinter326]

89. why?

Ok then why did the dem.s go 'right of center' to begin with? was that because of Nader?? That's backward logic. But that's the logical conclusion of your arguement.

[muchacho]

21. tactical suicide

I agree with everything you said but it does Ralph (and those of us that agree with him) no good to make this an election about ideology when to most of his actial and likely supports it's an election of utility - throw the bums out!

It's tactically suicide and that does him and us no good.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

27. No, 2000 showed us an even sadder set of days when the...

...Green Party candidate stated quite clearly for all to hear that he was running to keep Gore from winning.

He also stated prior to the election that if he had to vote, he would vote for Junior.

He also accepted money from GOP backers to allow him to run a series of ads in the Pacific Northwest critical of Gore.

Nader has also become independently wealthy...how he did that as a so-called "champion of the people" is beyond my ability to understand.

IMHO, the four points noted above pretty much cancel out whatever idealistic notion anyone has of Ralph Nader.

[mstrsplinter326]

99. Cut and paste

(Insert your favorite Canidate) stated quite clearly for all to hear that he was running to keep (a political rival) from winning.

(a polititan) also stated prior to the election that if he had to vote, he would vote for (a rival's rival).

(a polititan) also accepted money from (any corporation) to allow him to run a series of ads in the (anywhere) critical of (a political rival).

(a polititan) has also become independently wealthy...how he did that as a so-called "champion of the people" is beyond my ability to understand.

Cut, paste, and insert anyone you like who's been a major politian.

[NWHarkness]

35. Nader is not pro-labor

Ask a laid off auto worker if he or she thinks Nader is on their side.

[The Zanti Regent]

40. Stands on OUR side??

Phony Ralph talks the talk, but he don't walk the walk

Here's the site that exposes Nader for the phony that he is:

http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

Nader made my nephew Jonny a quadraplegic thanks to an Iraqui bullet. Thanks for nothing, Ralph!

[Mari333]

58. (((Zanti)))) yes its life and death now.

If you dont vote ABB, then you are voting GOP.

[pa28]

6. There is room for Nader

In the Democratic party. The backlash this piece mentions would be negated if Nader participated in the primary as a Democrat and productively brought these issues to light as a member of the party. As a member of another party he plays the adversary and should not expect sympathy or support from those of us who have kept the faith and a warm place for Nader's views from within the Democratic tent.

[aquart]

8. But he didn't, did he?

Whatever good thing he was, he's a whore now.

[fearnobush]

12. Darth Nader.

[FreakinDJ]

7. From FreeRepublic web site

To: steplock
perhaps some of us should hit the democrat forums and convince the people there to vote for Nader when the presidential race starts. Encourage the far left dems that haven't made up their mind to vote for him so we can split their vote.

48 posted on 08/11/2003 9:02:43 AM PDT by Johnbalaya
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies >

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/961974/posts

[Piperay]

13. Yup, confirmation

of what the repukes have in mind.

[bagnana]

14. BEWARE the newbie with multiple posts all re: Nader

The object is to distupt and distract. Don't be taken in. I suspect most 2000 Nader supporters wouldn't be tsk tsking about his views being "suppressed" this year. There is just too much at stake.

[brentspeak]

77. That's one of Freeper's favorite pastimes

Pretending to be Democrat, trying to convince the gullible to support Bush or Nader. It's always the same: "I'm a lifelong Democrat who's had it with the current Democrat party...I'm voting Nader...blah, blah, blah..."

brentspeak

[Enraged_Ape]

9. Nader needs to lead the national fight for instant runoff voting...

in the way that he successfully led the fight for seat belts and airbags. IRV is the only way a viable third-party candidate (including Ralph) would ever have a decent chance to win.

It is way past time that we adopted a real democratic voting system in this nation. What we've had which is just slightly better than in the Soviet Union.

I supported Ralph Nader in the last election because I wanted to see him and his party qualify for Federal funds. But that election, as we all know, resulted in disaster beyond anyone's expectations. It's just ridiculous that he would attempt this again without a system in place in which he could help, not hurt.

[Rebellious Republican]

18. Keep your eyes on the "Lounge" as well, look for newbies

posting a bunch of meaningless "Ask Me Anything" threads to get their numbers up!

[seabeyond]

32. i resent the h out of the seatbelt law

who is to tell me what to do with my body. if i belt up or not. government and law cannot keep me safe, i must accept this responsibility all on my own. i drive defensive dont get in accident and pay attention to what goes on, not the seatbelt that keeps me safe is my driving that does i dont want to live under some kinda fear dogma that i must be protected at all times from all harm

who is anyone to take away my decision ability to wear or not wear a seatbelt.

the good ole p.c.'ers i have left behind the last three years, deciding exactly who and how i am suppose to be, i have left alone cause of bush and his patriot act.

but they are next.

seatbelt law my *ss

if that is what we are cheering about with nadar, a resounding.........boo

[Enraged_Ape]

38. That would be a great philosophy, Seabeyond, if you lived in a vacuum

or on a deserted island. Maybe you do. I see there are no grammar or spelling teachers where you live, but I digress.

The nasty truth behind the big moronic fallacy you have that it affects no one else if you don't wear a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet, and it's only your problem if you get killed, is that--quite often--you WON'T get killed. You will simply end up severely cognitively impaired or paralyzed, taking your meals through a tube in your stomach and putting another tube up your pee-pee (or having a nurse do it) so that you can relieve yourself of urine.

Since you then can't work and can't take care of yourself, you then end up draining all of your personal funds until you ultimately wind up on the dole, and that's where I and all my fellow DUers come into your universe. And although I never mind helping out somebody who got a bad break, I do have a problem with carrying somebody who was a goddamn dumbass in the first place.

[seabeyond]

41. not a believer in name calling

even as a young child certainly not at 42. yet since with or without seatbelts this can occur, i suggest we go back to horse and wagon, wink

this was a republican arguement you know, that cost out of your pocket, but i assure you, wont cost a penny to you if i become a veggie. k........

[Enraged_Ape]

44. ????

Bit early in the morning for the sourmash, ain't it?

Or maybe it's just early in the morning. Because I can't understand a word of what you just wrote.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

48. Do you have any children, seabeyond?...

Have you ever seen the body of a child that has been thrown through a windshield or side window? I have, and it's not a very pleasant sight.

Do you have any family that will personally miss you if you get thrown from a car at 50-60 mph?

[JoFerret]

49. You would be better off banging your head

directly on the concrete. And while you are at it please don't pass on any of the social costs associated with your "accident" to the rest of us.

[seabeyond]

50. and those would be the arguements

to pass a law dictating peoples behavior. this is the same thing the right is saying in passing the patriot act

the bottom line they allow government to dictate, make our decisions

we have a society, be it the schools, teachers principles telling parents how to do their job, a police force creating us all as criminal. the p.c. driving their huge ass vehicles creating more danger for the little cars than not wearing a seat belt could ever create, telling me how bad i am not wearing seatbelt. not to mention the arguement for going to war for oil, as they drive gas guzzlers to keep their children safe, further, talking about the disenfranchised poor, as there is not a chance the poor could get into those huge vehicles to keep their kids safe. they obstruct views of turning and lites, take up lanes, all kinds of things to keep their family safe. so if someone is really concerned about my safety, outlaw these huge ass vehicles.

i am saying the law that was implemented has more issue than whether i go thru a windshield

and for those that have issue with my spelling, ah well

[JoFerret]

57. Your spelling is lovely

and not the problem. Your logic is.

[seabeyond]

63. simply in your opinion, lol

perception, creation, wink. so are you the one that likes to wear the patch

[sendero]

65. If I have to argue about laws that should not be....

... I'm going with many drug use laws because that is truly not the gov'mint's business.

I find it hard to get worked up about a $75 ticket for not wearing a seat belt when people are going to prison for smoking pot.

[donco6]

83. It's up to you, I guess.

But I remember seeing two kids get thrown out of a car that accidentally drifted off the shoulder of the road in front of me - all of whom would have been fine had they been belted in. As it was, one flew 30 feet in the air and was killed, the other fell out and was run over by the car and paralyzed. The third was belted and unscratched.

But, like I said, it's up to you.

[Nadero4]

36. I don't really see a problem..

I like Mr. Nader and like his stance on government reform. Having more choices to vote for president is a good thing in my book.

[Enraged_Ape]

39. I don't have a problem with it, either

Because no one with the last name of Bush will be able to be elected dog catcher after this election. Jane Fonda, Limp Bizkit, and the entire cast of Friends could throw their hats in on independent tickets, and it wouldn't make any difference. Bush is just that fuckin' lame.

[Entente]

37. Vote for Kerry, Listen to Nader

I have never voted for Nader, only for democrats. Even though I like what he says I am realistic and will only vote for democrats. Thats why "Vote for Kerry and Listen to Nader" is my motto for this year.

[fjc]

42. He sounds like a Republican when he accuses liberals of censorship.

Republicans equate criticism with censorship all the time. That is what he's doing here. Anyone with half a brain knows that asking him not to run, and doing so publically, is not censorship or anything like it. He's a fucking opportunist. Nothing more.

[Nadero4]

45. Go Ralphy!!

The Democrats had 8 years under Clinton to enact the progressive reforms they have promised time and time again. Bill Clinton used his 8 years to raise money for his legal defense; to sell out gays (don't ask don't tell); welfare recipients, and African-Americans by signing into law much of the Republican "Contract on America," and handgun reform advocates by never standing up to the NRA. He also failed to deliver on Kyoto, and made a mockery of the Democrats' traditional support of womens' issues by blaming his indiscretions on 'a stalker,' namely "That woman... Miss Lewinsky."

The Democrats are, by and large, just another corporate-military dominated party who would do anything to take and keep power. OK, so Nader doesn't stand a chance of winning. At least after I vote for him (again) I won't have another sellout fraud whore like Bill Clinton on my conscience.

[donco6]

54. Nader is an independent.

And this board is called "Democratic Underground."

Why are you here?

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donco6]

62. Oh, I think not.

Can we say . . . tombstone?

[Zero Gravitas]

76. Go Away

This is the Democratic Underground, we support the Democratic party in the 2004 elctions, not some egotisitcal asshole Bush Enabler.

[The_Casual_Observer]

92. "pretty letters" - spell dimwit

[Mari333]

59. tell that to the dead soldiers and wounded and their families.

thanks to a stolen election and Nader.
I saw that post on Freerepublic telling people to post for Nader on here. It wont work.
Its ABB, and all the Dems are United.

[brentspeak]

78. newbie "Nader supporter"

The post explains itself.

brentspeak

[Ladyhawk]

46. Do these newbies with low sperm...er, post counts think

they're actually fooling anyone? :)

[Nadero4]

47. Real clever....

The 2 corporate whore parties do the exact same things, for the exact same bajiliionaire corporate owners. I will keep voting for whatever third party candidate I think stands the best chance of torpedoing one of the major 2, until such time as we have a REAL not ILLUSORY choice in American federal politics.

[Mari333]

60. sniff: are you Zell Miller?

or Tom "I love Bu$h so he wont send any more anthrax to me" Daschle?
good god I hope you arent JoeMentum!
Anyone But Bush.

[donco6]

61. You might wanna check the rules . . .

"Democratic Underground may not be used for political organizing activity by supporters of any political party other than the Democratic party. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic party candidate."

I'm assuming your name, Nader04, is an advocacy for a candidate who is not a Dem, and is not running unopposed.

Just a guess . . .

[Piperay]

66. This IS the DEMOCRATIC

Underground. If you hate the Democrats perhaps you need a place that is friendlier to your side. :think:

[brentspeak]

79. Interesting that you seemed

to know that her post was directed at you. How it that?

brentspeak

[Piperay]

67. I think they

actually do. :freak:

[seabeyond]

64. i always.........see a higher

in everything. and one appears. just sat listening to news first time today and the feel in short time i have seen on just a couple news channels leads me to........

the democrats arent mincing words, flat all about the ego, there is not another reason for nadar to do. he didnt even talk issue until later, when asked. it is all about him

and the democrat are so passioned this election and focused, and sites up asking nadar not to run, and floridians apologize for 2000 ect..........giving a lot of surge in strength for the democratic party on this day. it has not made nadar stronger, very much weaker, yet i see such a confidence in the democrats that is always inspiring for the people, ergo another shift in peoples mind for election 2004.

[Catherine Vincent]

72. Amazing......

"At least after I vote for him (again) I won't have another sellout fraud whore like Bill Clinton on my conscience."

Amazing that a poster with only 9 posts is allowed to say this and hasn't been tombstoned.

Tsk tsk tsk....

[Media_Lies_Daily]

103. And what's even more amazing is the number of contributing...

...DU posters with a thousand or more posts that have run afoul of what I describe as the DU "free speech limitation" when responding to the "low-count/no count" posters.

DU claims to support free speech, but apparently it is only for those posters that hit and run. DU also claims to be supportive of an impassioned and energized Democratic Party representation on DU as long as everybody maintains a low-keyed nicey-nice presentation.

Amazing.