Should Nader be eligible for placement on the Top 10 Conservative Idiots?

[ButterflyBlood]

I say yes. For all practical purposes, he is a conservative. He does nothing but further conservative goals and support them, he benefits progressives in no way.

[billybob537]

1. He is actively

engaged in getting Shrubco* reselected. That makes him THE FOOLS TOOL.

[Warpy]

2. He may be arrogant and wrongheaded

...but he's no conservative. That should eliminate him from the list.

[Sparkly]

6. How can you tell?

By his words, he doesn't seem conservative. By his actions, he is.

[lovedems]

8. I disagree. Idealogically he may not be a conservative but he is doing

the work of the conservatives so I think that makes him a conservative by default, therefor making him eligible for the list.

[fryguy]

3. if not on the top ten

then at least on-going honorable mention.....

[NewYorkerfromMass]

4. Only sane individuals qualify.

Ralph is out of consideration.

[asthmaticeog]

5. Gotta call bullshit on this.

However misguided his running for president may be, his pro-labor, anti-globalization goals are anything but conservative, and as for benefitting progressives in no way, who else has galvanized the left like he did? The dems need to bring that left back into the party, absolutely, and Nader absolutely should not be running this year, but before Nader's 2000 run there was no useful left coalition of any kind.

[taxidriver]

7. he's already been on there at least twice.

so...i guess he must be eligible, huh?

[ButterflyBlood]

12. hmmmm, I didn't know that

good call though admins!

[Dogmudgeon]

9. My only objection

Including Nader would seriously piss off the 10-15% of DUers who support the guy and will go to their graves believing they did the right thing and chanting about their consciences.

I think Nader did a lot of damage, too, and in a lot of ways. But these times call for solidarity.

Job One: Fire Team Bush.

Job Two: Destroy neo-Conservatism and the Religious Right.

Job Three: Build a new Liberalism (under whatever label you choose) that can transform America and the World.

They're big jobs.

And there's a sociopath in the White House who is intent on restoring a Holy Feudalism. Other sociopaths world-'round are themselves hungry for blood and domination. All this coming at a time when energy costs are about to finish the process of bankrupting the international financial system and when climate change could make lower-tech living a grisly joke.

Bitching from/about Nader won't help a bit.

--bkl

[Gothmog]

10. He is a tool of the Bushies and should be treated as such

Nader is a tool of the Bush/Cheney campaign and is being used by them to hurt Senator Kerry and the Democrats. As such, Nader should be deemed eligible to be a top ten conservative idiot.

[Solidarity]

11. No

No. He's hardly a conservative by either his statements or deeds.

But, if you want to slander him in order to promote a political agenda I guess you may as well call him a fascist or reactionary.

And name calling certainly helps one to evade any rational discussion and debate on Nader's policies and candidacy.

[debsianben]

13. "he does NOTHING but further conservative goals?"

My got, that's an ambitious claim. Let's think this trough. NOTHING but further conservative goals?

So his decades of working 12 hour days doing progressive legal work helped advance conservative goals?

"Unsafe at Any Speed" and his numerous successful lawsuits against corporate wrongdoers all somehow helped advance conservative goals?

Which were more important conservative goals--seatbelts or airbags? I'm just curious.

Was he somehow advancing conservative goals when he was a big part of the lobbying effort to create OSHA and the EPA? Or when he helped write the Clean Water Act?

Suing Ganette on behalf of the Detroit newspaper strikers in the 90s helped advance conservative goals?

Advocating against Ashcroft's nomination as AG (he wanted to testify in the hearings but was blocked from doing so by vindictive Dems) helped advance conservative goals?

Perhaps he has been helping to advance conservative goals more recently by campaigning and petitioning for Bush and Cheney to be impeached?

Now, it's one thing to say that he is unwittingly advancing conservative goals by running for President, reasonable people can agree to disagree about that. But saying that he does NOTHING BUT ADVANCE CONSERVATIVE GOALS?

Given the consistent record, that's just foolish.

[Sparkly]

14. "it's one thing to say he is unwittingly advancing conservative goals"

Okay, he's unwittingly advancing conservative goals. He's still advancing conservative goals by effectively supporting Bush.

[Solidarity]

18. Sure

I'm sure Bush just loves being slammed by Nader.

[Sparkly]

19. I'm sure he does!

As long as Nader's in the race, pulling more votes from Kerry, the Chimp's got another booster!

[sangh0]

15. That's a very weak defense for Nader

You can't mention anything porgressive he's done in the last ten years. And as far as Nader's opposition to Ashcroft, here's what he said:

"Let's see what really happens. Ashcroft is going to be a prisoner of bureaucracy." -- Common Dreams 4-03-2001

[debsianben]

41. First of all, I'm Not Defending Nader

I'm pointing out the abject, unbelievable stupidity of claiming that the guy does "NOTHING but advance conservative goals." That's a separate issue.

Secondly, much of what I mentioned was within the last ten years--the lawsuit against Gannette on behalf of the Detroit newspaper strikers, his vocal, outspoken opposition not only to the war in Iraq but also to the war in Afghanistan almost universally supported by Dems, his attempt to speak out against Ashcroft at the confirmation hearings, his petitioning to get Bush and Cheney impeached for war crimes, etc. Not to mention, of course, all the day-to-day involvement in his various legal, educational and advocacy projects that to the best of my knowledge he has never exactly retired from.

One might even mention whatever campaigning he's done for various Green candidates who have actually won rather than spoiled elections (the Mayor of New Paltz, for example) as evidence of activity even in the electoral field that has hardly done "nothing but advance conservative goals."

[sangh0]

42. Yeah, right

Arguing against the idea that "Nader does nothing but advance conservative goals" is, by definition, defending Nader. Unless you think advancing conservative goals is a good thing.

Also, the things you mentioned are ten years old. When people post about Nader being a Bushie, they're talking about current events.

And while he may speak out from time to time, I pay more attention to what a politician does. IMO, politician's will say anything they think people want to hear. The rubber hits the road when it's time to act. But that's just me.

And based on what Nader has done, I agree that he has been advancing conservative goals. Though it may not have been the ONLY thing he has done, saying "Nader does not always help the conservatives, only sometimes" is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

[debsianben]

46. Well, yeah...and?

I'm defending Nader against the specific (idiotic) allegation that he does "nothing but advance conservative goals," which is lightyears away from saying that his runs for President have advanced conservative goals.

Similarly, if some one were to tell me that John Kerry was a space alien who drank the blood of little babies and danced with Hitler's zombie, I'd be "defending Kerry" in a very narrow, not terribly interesting sense if I denied those (comparably idiotic) hypothetical allegations.

The fact is that, no matter how narrow a slice of time you look at, Nader spends 99% of his time in legal, educational and advocacy efforts to speak out against and oppose conservative goals. Even if you think his Presidential runs advance conservative goals, it's still idiotic almost beyond belief to claim that he does "nothing but advance conservative goals."

[sangh0]

51. Nader advances conservative goals

and if your only beef is with the use of the word "only", then I'd say you've lost sight of the forest for the trees.

no matter how narrow a slice of time you look at, Nader spends 99% of his time in legal, educational and advocacy efforts to speak out against and oppose conservative goals.

And no matter how you slice it, in this century Nader has done more for the conservatives than he has for the liberals.

[bobbyboucher]

54. No more than you do.

Get a grip.

[robbedvoter]

38. Basketball! Don't forget his basketball courageous fights!

When "same as Bush" Gore was opposing the war, Nader was bravely saving baseball!

[union_maid]

16. Been there and belongs there n/t

eom

[Kahuna]

17. He has already been named on this list.

:D

[GreenPartyVoter]

20. If Nader should be, then perhaps Kennedy, Carter, and FDR should too.

[ButterflyBlood]

21. Did they ever work to benefit Republicans?

n/t

[Sparkly]

24. I seem to recall they were Democrats

They did see significant differences between Democrats and Republicans.

[VOX]

22. He's certainly an enabler of the RW...

Whether or not he is aware of it, the right wing gains when he runs. Why else would conservatives contribute to his campaign?

[Go Eagles]

23. He has already made it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/144.html

[MadHound]

25. This is so full of shit

Nader is not a conservative, in fact he is much more to the left than that DLC/corporate whore Kerry. Just because you folks are pissed that a REAL liberal is running shouldn't make you blind to reality, but hey, I suppose that blindness is a good thing when you are voting for the lesser EVIL instead of the good:eyes:

[union_maid]

26. Who's blind to reality?

When someone does something knowing full well the possible consequences, you have to conclude it's intentional. When he does it again, there is no doubt left. Nader's only function is to keep Bush in office and how you can spin that as liberal is beyond me. Bush called himself a compassionate conservative, but his actions gave like to that claim. So it goes with Nader.

[MadHound]

27. Nader is running simply to give the US an alternative

To the corporate whoring of the BOTH parties. This is his right, so deal with it. Hell, there will probably be ten more third party candidates running in Novemember, will you demonize them as much as you do Nader?

I find it laughable, in a sad pathetic way that people who call themselves Democrats are so undemocratic, not wishing for third party candidates to run. I didn't hear any Dems whining when Perot ran, why are you whining about Nader. Don't tell me you are still buying that inaccurate piece of groupthink that Nader cost Gore the election? That is so '01 friend. Hell, even Al From, the ultimate Democratic insider doesn't blame Nader for Gore's lost(the first intelligent thing I've seen from From), why should you?

All that this blame Nader game does is allow the Democratic party continue it's downward drift into corporate whoredom. Instead of playing the bogus blame game, try waking up instead and seizing the party back from the corporate whores and the 'Pug lites. I guarantee you that if you and other Dems did this, you wouldn't have to worry about Nader or his supporters anymore, for the would come flocking bakc to a revitalized Democratic party.

But hey, it is easier to stick one's head in the sand and play the blame Nader game rather than take a cold hard look at the Democratic party and take actions to correct its many many faults. Trouble is, such actions only allow the corporate whores to solidify their hold on the party, prompting ever more people to flee it. So the choice is yours friend, which course will you take, the easy one or the best one?

[union_maid]

29. There is no third alternative

That's just playing make-believe. One of two people will be elected or selected, just like last time. All Nader is doing it helping to make it possible for the one that's a card carrying member of the radical right to stay in office. That's a conservative idiot if ever I heard one. Also, just five minutes ago, Robert Novak was invoking Ralph Nader to make talking points against Kerry.

And I know what happened it in 2000 and Nader was one of the factors that put Bush in office. I can't blame Nader apologists for being in denial about that considering that things turned out the way they did, but to stay there in this year, the way things are is beyond belief.

[MadHound]

33. Yes, Nader was one of the factors, one minor factor in a myriad of others

That contributed to Gore's defeat.

Let us look at some of those other factors and see how they stack up to Nader.

First, there is the actual selection done by the Supreme 5. I see no Nader influence here, do you?

Second, there is Gore's handling of the Bushco/ChoicePoint votescam scandal. Author/journalist Greg Palast handed the disenfranchisment scandal to the Gore camp on a silver platter. Name, dates and who was involved. Think of it, you are the Democratic nominee, and in the midst of a contested decision, well before the Supreme 5 made the selection, you are handed the means to not only WIN the election, but also the means to banish the Bushies to the political wilderness forever AND uphold your sworn oath of office. What would you do? Well the Gore campaign decided to sit on this information. I don't see any Nader influence here, do you?

Third, Gore ran a horrible recount process. While the Bush camp was bringing in the A team, Gore was bringing in the Bad News Bears. Instead of doing the perfectly legal manuever, one that as it turns out would have won him the election, of recounting the entire state, the Gore camp opts for the insane ploy of trying to cherry pick which counties and precints to recount. Utter insanity that ultimately helped cost Gore the election. Did Nader have any influence on these stunningly bad decions? I don't think so.

Fourth, Gore's stance on enviromental issues cost him nearly 600,000 votes in Florida. Gore's endorsement of off-shore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico cost him the votes of 198,000 registered Dems and 398,000 self described liberal. These people were so pissed by Gore's kowtowing to his corporate master(BP Oil) that they decided to double screw Gore and voted for Bush. Is Nader's sinister hand at work in this? No, just Gore's incompetence.

In fact according to DLC guru, Al From, Nader actually helped Gore in Florida. To quote From, "The assertion that Nader's marginal vote hurt Gore is not borne out by polling data. When exit pollers asked voters how they would have voted in a two-way race, Bush actually won by a point. That was better than he did with Nader in the race." And trust me, these guys have GREAT exit pollters. You can read the rest of the article here:<http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=179&contentid=2919>

So yes, Nader had some effect. But apparently it was minor at worst, far outweighted in importance by Gore's own fumbling campaign, and at best, Nader actually helped the Gore campain.

But hey, I can't fault Dem apologists for making Nader into a scapegoat for the Democratic Party's failings. It is hard to deal with the fact that the party you have given your blood, sweat, tears, money and votes to for years and decades no longer gives a damn about anything except money. Most people would rather live in denial, crying "Nader Nader Nader" rather than come to grips with the stark reality that the party the once loved has become a corporate whore, selling themselves out to the highest bidder. Me, I would rather take reality head on and work for a better future. If that means leaving behind the shell of a burnt out party behind, so be it, it is better that it dies anyway, the way it is drifting ever rightward, always selling out for the big bucks. Me, I'm working for a real difference, and if you want to come along, fine. Otherwise you are going to be stuck with an albatross around your neck, explaining away more and more horrors that the party commits in your name, with your money.

[Cheswick2.0]

37. Nader is running because that is how he makes his living

Just like Larouche, he is a profesional candidate. Besides a few issues that the left is hot on, Nader isn't particularly liberal. He is certainly an authoritarian by nature.
Mostly he is a thorougly unappealing man. Anyone who could campaign on the lie that Gore is no different than bush is not all there.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. If Nader is a "conservative" what does that make Kerry?

While Kerry moves ever more to the right, you consider Nader a conservative?

You must think Zell Miller a flaming leftist, and Dubya an atheistic commie.

[sangh0]

30. Typical Nader defense

Call Kerry names

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

31. Typical Kerry defense.

Avoid the issue.

[sangh0]

32. Still name-calling

.

[Hippo_Tron]

35. The logic is that Nader is a closet Bush enabler...

Many believes that despite his public positions on the issues, his only real reason for running is to get Bush re-elected. I don't completely agree with this theology but that is what some believe.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. Some believe in the Easter Bunny.

That doesn't make it so.

[sangh0]

43. And some believe "there's no difference"

and others lie about it.

SO what?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. No difference? Did I say that?

I don't think so. As I've said in other posts, Kerry would be infinitely better than Bush in most departements. And, I hope that Kerry wins. But, ignoring his deficits in foreign policy, particularly Iraq, in the name of "party unity" is tantamount to giving the OK to what is obviously a caving in on Kerry's part to Bush. The "he's not as bad" argument doesn't fly.

[sangh0]

52. Nader said it

I would have thought you'd know that.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Right now, yes...

Anybody who aids shrubco and then complains about him when he gets elected deserves to go on that list.

[Hekate]

36. He must really like what the Bush Cabal is doing...

...to try to ensure a second term for them.

I used to have a lot of respect for Ralph Nader, but that ended the day I read that he said there was no difference between voting for Bush and voting for Gore. Then he said it some more, so we'd all get the message. Still, I didn't blame him for tipping Bush to victory --because the corruption that enabled Bush to enter the Oval Office was just so blatant--until last year when I read a bit more about the numbers of voters Nader managed to pull away from Gore in Florida and a few other key states.

So, Ralphie, all I have to say is: "You must really like what they're up to, to want to give them another assist this year."

Ralph Nader Go Home and Shut Up.

Hekate
who likes John Kerry's record of public service just fine

[meow2u3]

40. Yes--and we should have a new category

Sleeping with the Enemy

[tom_paine]

44. Actually I am becoming more convinced than every St. Ralph

LOATHES the Filthy Little Nobodies he once helped.

Maybe it was always that way. maybe he had a mid-life realization involving deeply-held perdsonal beliefe ro perhaps Grover Norquist and a suitcase full of cash.

Who knows? Who cares? St. Ralph has earned the 1933 German Communist Award for Helping Hitler Win.

(well, actually the grandchildren of Hitelr's Angel)

[debsianben]

47. Get the history straight

In 1933, the German Social Democrats helped Hitler win by supporting the "mainstream conservative" Hindenburg as a "lesser evil" to Hitler and declining to run their own candidate. Hindenburg won, appointed Hitler as Chancellor and the rest is history.

Kind of like how liberals in 2000 voted in a bunch of Democratic Senators who then proceeded to vote to confirm Ashcroft as AG (something that Nader, unlike Lieberman, Hilary Clinton, etc., opposed.)

[debsianben]

48. Nader-Bashing and Racism

The fundamental reason that Bush "won" the 2000 election is the Jim Crow tactics used to prevent hundreds of thousands of black and chicano voters from casting ballots. The fact that so many Dems seem to have forgotten all about that and reserve their anger for Nader's decision to exercise his democratic right to run says volumes about their priorities and outlook. Black people being denied the opportunity to vote? No big deal. Nader running? Greatest crime in the history of the world, let's all spew venow about it.

[Darranar]

49. No, he isn't a conservative...

though he may be an idiot.

[Exgeneral]

50. "no" on a technicality

He's not a conservative.
He's a top ten idiot on many lists, but no conservative.

[bobbyboucher]

53. You guys look so silly with

this anti-Nader religion. It's fucking ridiculous.