General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Sic semper Naderus. (A response to the recent pro-Nader posts) [View all]riqster
(13,986 posts)Because that is what he did. You can ascribe motivations to it all you want, but no one has yet disputed the actions themselves. And that is telling. Even you don't try to argue the facts presented. So you know that he took Bush money and campaign assistance, and verbally supported a Bush victory. Truth. And you DO seem to support it.
As to your "justification" of his actions ("one party with two right wings" , that is not exculpatory. Nader wanted things to get so bad for the marginalized and dispossessed that a new political party (including himself at its head) could take over. Frankly, that is despicable and inhumane, to deliberately increase the sufferings of an Other in order to accomplish one's political agenda.
And if you support that kind of abusive approach to politics...well, you aren't much different from Bush the lesser, because that is exactly what he did. With Nader's assistance and expressed support.