Nader voter on Air America is annoying the shit out of me!

[NightTrain]

As I mentioned earlier, this hour of "The Laura Flanders Show" is dedicated to what she calls "The Great Nader Debate."

One of the show's two guests is the publisher of Common Courage Press out of Maine, who has just written a book on why he plans to vote for Nader this year. But both Flanders and her other guest--the webmaster of http://www.repentantnadervoter.com --keep poking holes in his arguments! Among them:

1. The Nader voter claimed that Kerry said he would appoint anti-abortion judges. Flanders replied that what Kerry actually said was that he would *consider* doing so, but only if it did not threaten Roe v. Wade.

2. He stated that he didn't want to wait for another four-year election cycle to go by before progressives worked on building a powerful third-party movement. Both Flanders and her other guest pointed out that Nader is running as an independent, which means that voting for him this year will *not* contribute to building up a third party.

3. He said that while the Republican Party is indeed trying to get Nader on the ballot in all 50 states to split the liberal vote, the GOP is "doing the right thing for the wrong reason." :puke:

I can't fucking believe these people! How goddamned delusional can you be? :grr:

[JohnLocke]

1. Very.

[stepnw1f]

2. IThe Premise He Is Giving Is So Dishonest

He equates the draft with Kerry. This statement is false. He also keeps accusing Kerry of going toward the right. Since when. Maybe the guy is a fuckin moderate.

[lanparty]

3. This is like holding an anti-war demonstration ....

... on a battlefield between two armies. It may be morally correct, but you're ultimately doing no good.

What amazes me is that ardent Nader supporters never insist that Ralph run for something OTHER than president.

As far as Republican support goes, that's like saying you've made a deal with the devil to raise church funding. The devil is smarter than you and you can be sure that you are HIS agent, not the other way around.

[NightTrain]

5. Interesting point!

If Nader is serious about getting elected, why not enter a race he might conceivably win? I have to assume that it's because Nader is *not* serious about getting elected to an office.

[stepnw1f]

6. It's As If They Don't Think It Can Get Worse

Look... if Bush is re-elected, there will only be a One Party System. Forget about a third party. And once fascism takes root Democracy is DEAD!! The idea of a 3rd Party is stubornly complacent and based on belief. He states how he is concerned about his kid going into a draft with Kerry... what with Bush does he think it's not going to happen? At least with Kerry there is a chance.

As far I can tell... it's about power and being right as opposed to being wrong. So childish in such an extreme time.

[lanparty]

15. Hehe good point.

These creeps could find themselves being a 2 party system advocates railing against "INGSOC" before they know it.

[muchacho]

4. Thing is..

I generally agree with the Nader advocate. I see Kerry as a conservative Dem that is only appealing to me because of the extraordinarily extreme policies of the current administration.

I sympathize with the Nader voter, but Bush is dangerous and we need not to piss away the good for want of the perfect.

[latebloomer]

7. Elect Kerry

And then, keep fightin' like hell!!

[muchacho]

12. as Chomsky says

Noam Chomsky tells the Guardian he supports John Kerry over George Bush because “small differences can translate into large outcomes…in this case as in 2000.” The description of Kerry as “Bush-lite” is “not inaccurate”, he says, describing the Republicans and Democrats as “two factions of the business party”. But Chomsky notes the “choice” between the two can “make a difference”, even if only “a fraction” in foreign policy and “maybe even more dramatically” domestically. Chomsky fears “the people around Bush are very deeply committed to dismantling the achievements of popular struggle through the past century…the present group in power is particularly cruel and savage in this respect.” Chomsky also told his interviewer that Americans would be more strongly opposed to the Iraq occupation if they were made more fully aware by the media that the US was planning “a powerful, permanent, military and diplomatic presence in Iraq”, and he called for an international trial for Saddam Hussein where US and Western complicity in his crimes could be subjected to public scrutiny.

[VOX]

10. But you're able to perceive the bigger picture (and the bigger threat)...

Than most diehard Naderites, and even Nader himself. Their inability to do so makes for a potentially disastrous lack of a sense of priorities. In other years and other times, a third-party agenda would be welcomed.

But there is a clear and present danger now, and it must be taken care of.

[havocmom]

8. America is paying the price for poor

mental health care.

[jrthin]

9. Annoying, too, is Flander.

She sometimes remind me of the circle firing squad--let's shoot our own.

[latebloomer]

11. I like Flanders

I find her refreshing as compared to the centrist-Dem Franken types.

[ASanders84]

13. Dems and Repubs

are both being selfish azzholes here. As much as I would rather not see Nader on the ballot, he deserves to be. And Nader has kind of turned his back on his plea that American politics is corrupt (PACS, special interest) by taking money from the GOP, ultimate hypocrisy. What a disaster.

[TrueAmerican]

14. He only "deserves to be" if he can meet the state

requirements for getting on the ballot.

If he is cheating to get the required signatures than his opponents have the right to challenge.