Why I'm a Green Against Nader

[earthside]

Commentary and related Links at: www.Earthside.com

Why I'm a Green Against Nader

Today I leave for the Green Party National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. I am a delegate and look forward to participating in the exercise of grassroots democracy in a meaningful way.Updates to www.Earthside.com will resume Monday afternoon, June 28, and I will try and provide a report and commentary on what happened at the convention.

Controversy is swirling around what Greens will do in Milwaukee. Unlike the Democratic and Republican conventions, there will be no coronation for us. It is one of the exhilarating aspects of being a member of the Green Party; we are young and new and contentious ... the kind of excitement that real American politics should embody. In my opinion, it is the kind of genuine people politics that you get when the big corporate and special interest money is 'out', and the true concerns of average Americans is 'in'.

This week Ralph Nader announced that California Green, Peter Camejo, was his choice for vice presidential running mate in his independent candidacy. Nader has stated since last year that he was not seeking the Green Party's nomination in 2004. Yet, he has recently said that he would welcome the Green Party's "endorsement". Nader's pick of Camejo is clearly a political move to facilitate that outcome.

I am against the Green Party National Convention taking this action.

I am a supporter of an effort called 'Greens for Impact'.

I believe that nominating or 'endorsing' Ralph Nader in 2004 will inflict a severe blow to the future of the Green Party.

Like it or not, Greens are tagged with the 'spoiler' label for 2000; I've heard all the contrary arguments -- I accept them, so there's no need for fellow Greens to e-mail me and restate them to me for the thousandth time. But the political reality is that if the Green Party supports a Nader candidacy in 2004, and Nader in any way contributes to the reinstallation of George W. Bush and Dick "Chickenhawk" Cheney into the White House, the wrath and retribution of millions of progressives and liberals of good will and good conscience will justly be directed at the Green Party.

I am not a member of the Green Party to drop the torch on our own funeral pyre. Going down in flames for a "righteous cause" that leaves only ashes for our reform movement is not why I am traveling a thousand miles to Milwaukee. We're trying to build a viable political future for this nation, not just in 2004, but for 2006 and 2008 and 2010 and for generations to come.

I am extremely disappointed with what Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo are attempting to do. If Ralph Nader wants to be the Green Party candidate this year, he should announce his candidacy as a Green, he should register to vote as a Green, he should come to Milwaukee and address the convention. If he will not do those things (and he has indicated that he will not), then Ralph Nader is not a Green! We should not extend to him some special privilege that is reserved just for the personage of 'Ralph Nader' ... Indeed, I cannot hardly imagine a more un-Green political scenario than the one that has emerged between Nader and Camejo in the last week. It smacks of a back room, closed door political deal to 'deliver' the Green vote to 'Boss Ralph'. For Greens, I want to ask: "Is that kind of practice of politics why you are a Green?"

If you believe in political reform, for bringing our government and decision-making processes back to the people, if you believe in decentralization, if you believe in equality and an end to special privilege, it seems to me that you cannot accept the maneuvering that wants to give our valuable nomination or 'endorsement' to Nader, an independent, Reform Party-endorsed, 'Populist Party', non-Green, candidate for president.

Now, I'll write just briefly about the 'safe state' campaign strategy. I believe this republic is in the greatest jeopardy since the Civil War. I contend that George W. Bush and the radical Republicans are well on the path to completely subvert this constitutional democracy into a semi-theocratic plutocracy. I'll put this plainly: I will not do anything that will lead to another four years (or more) of Bush running this country. Period. I will not let the 'perfect be the enemy of the good.' I will not go down in flames with Nader when there is a chance to increase the survival odds of liberty, equality, and justice in the United States.
I will say this very plainly as well: Anyone who thinks that John Kerry is the same as George W. Bush is a political fool. Period.

If by November, Colorado is solidly in the Republican presidential column, I will vote for David Cobb (who I still believe will be our nominee). If Colorado is close and there is a chance that this state's electoral votes can be denied George W. Bush ... I will vote accordingly.

The dissolution of our republic will not be on my conscience.

I believe that the Green Party offers a great avenue for the expansion of freedom and economic equality for America. We articulate principles in the 'Ten Key Values' that will help reform and create a new society that can protect and cherish our Mother Earth, and can build a culture of genuine peace and brotherhood and sisterhood among all human beings.

I ... Am a Green. So in Milwaukee, I will vote only for a Green candidate for our presidential nominee.

I ... Am an American. I will vote in November to save this country, one way or another.

Dave Chandler
Colorado Delegate
to the Green Party National Convention

[mzmolly]

1. AMAZING LETTER!

:toast: to Dave Chandler!

[mzmolly]

2. This letter should be read by everyone!

:kick:

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. Great letter. I'm one of those Progressives being talked about.

My feelings about the Green Party are very much balanced at the edge of a knife right now. I have been more than sympathetic in the past, when I believed most Greens saw the Political landscape much as Dave does. Now I foresee the possibility of becoming militantly Anti-Green. I really hope it doesn't come to that. Good Luck to David Cobb and Greens for Impact.

[mzmolly]

4. I agree Tom. I don't know any Green who can't support Cobb and his

method of running, but I know several who feel Nader is using the party and may divide it beyond repair.

[Leilani]

20. Pat Buchanan hijacked the Reform Party

to get ballot access, & transformed a pro-choice & moderate party into a Fundie haven. In the end, he destroyed it.

As a moderate, I supported some of the basic tenets of Reform: anti-free trade, balanced budgeting, & trying to get to a grass roots movement.

[mzmolly]

5. Kick

:kick:

[wyldwolf]

6. Anyone who thinks that John Kerry is the same as George W. Bush ...

...is a political fool. Period.

Good quote.

[mstrsplinter326]

16. ditto

for nader=bush. fools.

[RiffRandell]

7. Great letter!!!!!

Funny, no Naderites are responding to your post. I guess the letter is too rational and honest for them.

[no name no slogan]

8. Nice Job Dave!!!

I have several friends who are GP activists in MN (I even helped out a couple GP candidates in the 90s myself), and I think you speak for the majority of Greens in this country this year.

I have yet to find ONE single Green Party activist who is supporting Nader for the nomination this year. Most of them are tired of his arrogance and the way he has treated the party in his past bids-- especially when it comes to building the party at the grassroots. And I also agree the Camejo deal stinks to high heaven. I can now understand why LaDuke is not on the ticket with him this year: she can see that it's about Ralph first, the Green Party second.

I hope the convention goes well for you in Milwaukee this weekend. I know the Greens have a tough job ahead of them this year, but I'm sure they'll make a good choice this year.

:)

[Padraig18]

9. What an AWESOME letter!

:D

[Mike L]

10. Dave, did I ever tell you, "You're my Hero"?

Spectacular letter! Thank you.

ABB

[bushwakker]

11. Nader uses the Greens - then throws them away

He wants ballot access. He doesn't give two shits about the Greens. Thanks for your letter. I hope your view is the previling on in Milwaukee this weekend.

[Mike L]

12. Well, this will be my last plug for:

http://www.thenaderfactor.com/

Click to see their ads.

[mzmolly]

13. I'm hopin your guy wins Dave!

:hi:

[formernaderite]

14. This is what a lot of greens plan to do:

"If by November, Colorado is solidly in the Republican presidential column, I will vote for David Cobb (who I still believe will be our nominee). If Colorado is close and there is a chance that this state's electoral votes can be denied George W. Bush ... I will vote accordingly."

It's a very sensible approach...

[mstrsplinter326]

15. Knowing that Indiana is a solidly ass-backward state

Makes it easy for me to say that I will not be voting for Kerry. I may feel differently if I lived in Michigan. But I feel I have to reiterate that Kerry, if he expects us not to "spoil" this one, has a lot of work to do. I don't think a lot covers it. I think he can expect from me nearly the passionate disdain (sans the hate) that Bush has received from me. As Bush's policies continue through the Kerry adminstration many liberals will undoubtedly be silent as the democrats of recent have proved they can appease with words even when their actions countermand their supposed beliefs.

Sure Kerry looks better than bush but think about perspective here! If Falwell were president and you felt bush were your only option to remove him, how do you think you would vote??

It's an ethical dilemma that, for the common man, has no true win-win solution.

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. It's not just economic policies

Bush is hurting the planet much worse than Kerry ever would with his environmental Scorched Earth policies. Get Bush out, than keep organizing.

[mstrsplinter326]

18. Same message different year

In any election year both of the two major parties are going to say that the election is too close for the formation of a large third party. It'll be unsafe, they say. Then they scare you with the "consequences", ignoring the consequences and inherent problems of a two party system.

You want to talk safety?? Indiana went 75/25 in 2000 for Bush. You think my voting for a third candidate (and no, not necessarily nader) is going to really hurt kerry? That's obviously false.

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. No, I agree

You can't hurt Kerry in Indiana. I am comfortable with Cobb's position also. I am intrinsically sympathetic to Green. The Nader shade though makes me see Red. The U.S. would not have invaded Iraq if Nader had not competed hard in swing states. Many other factors contributed also, obviously, but that fact, for me, remains. Gore was not Bush.

[mstrsplinter326]

21. Gore may or may not have attacked Iraq

I can't profess to retroactively envision the future. But if Gore had policies that actually differed from Bush, then winning the election would have been simple. If you give people the choice between a republican and someone trying to act republican, I'd imagine they are going to go the for the real deal.

Kerry's just a different shade of Gore, passing up opportunities to mobilize all the people hurt by Bush. If Kerry wants to be a uniter, he can't forget the left and simulatiously expect our votes. If Kerry loses this election because of a 'spoiler.' He only has himself to blame. He knows how to win our vote. If were SO INCREDABLY DANGEROUS in swing states then co-opt the issues! It's so easy. We want things like clean air and human rights. Even true conservatives will go for those things. So basic, yet as long as we can be quelled with spoiler talk and the "next election" bull, it will never happen. The bleeding has to be stopped before we run out of blood.