Media: 'Dems blame Nader for 2000', OK but..

[G_j]

Without fail, every story I've heard about Nader's announcement includes this.

Yes, some or many do blame Nader.

**But why is this part of the story NEVER mentioned?
(Hint- Republican crimes, not to mention media complicity)
--------------------
**Clock turned back on cvil rights

"up to 57,000 persons, the majority of them African American and Democrats, had their voting rights removed."

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=182&row=1

Tuesday, November 5, 2002

ISAAC HERNANDEZ. Special for EL MUNDO

LOS ANGELES.- The last presidential election, Greg Palast, journalist for the BBC and the newspaper The Guardian, investigated a voters purge list in the Florida electoral list. According to his investigation, up to 57,000 persons, the majority of them African American and Democrats, had their voting rights removed. The story is repeated in today´s election. In his book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, Palast tells how the State of Florida hired a company named DBT for four million dollars to remove felons from the electoral list to keep them from voting. Palast demonstrates how Jeb Bush´s office asked DBT to grow the list to the max, including voters with similar names and born on the same date as the felons.

Thousands of people came to the electoral office to vote only to find out that they were felons.

Originally we thought it was 57,000 people that were purged. Now I got the info from DBT that there were 94,000 people in this list. 91,000 were innocent. If those people have voted, Al Gore would most likely have received the 537 votes that he needed to win. What makes the story so sad and rotten is that the Secretary of State of Florida, Katherine Harris, has agreed that innocent people were removed, but they dragged their feet and have used this same list in this election.

According to the settlement from the NAACP lawsuit, the State has to revise the list and return the voting rights to the innocent ones. But they are going to wait until after the elections to do so.
Jeb Bush arranged to steal the election in 2000 for his brother, and is keeping it stolen for his own re-election. Election 2000 is not old news; it's what happening on Tuesday. On top of that, computerized voting - it's a real nightmare. Machines continue to fail in black districts in Florida. It happened in September and we will see it on Tuesday. All the problems of 2000, but it's going to be worse. -What is surprising is that the main media channels are not talking about this.
<snip>
-----------------------
About The Voting Rights Act
http://www.usdoj.gov/kidspage/crt/voting.htm

Voting Rights

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits discrimination in voting practices or procedures because of race and color. In 1957 and 1960, Congress had enacted voting rights laws that took small steps toward increasing minority voting participation for all Americans. The 1965 Act, however, made huge strides towards making voting rights a reality. The Act prohibited literacy tests and poll taxes which had been used to prevent blacks from voting (see Background and Introduction). In 1975, Congress recognized the need to protect citizens who did not read or speak English well enough to participate in the political process and expanded the protections of the Voting Rights Act to them.

In 1963, civil rights activists began an effort to register black voters in Dallas County, Alabama. During 1963 and 1964, although they brought potential voters by the hundreds to the registrar's office in the courthouse in Selma, they were unable to get them registered to vote. In
January and February 1965, protests were held in Selma to bring attention to this violation of rights. The protests were met by violence by Sheriff James Clark and his deputies. On February 17, a small civil rights march ended in the shooting of Jimmy Lee Jackson who died from his wounds several days later. The civil rights activists decided to hold a memorial march from Selma to the state capitol in Montgomery on March. 7.
<snip>
--------------------
http://www.house.gov/corrinebrown/press107/pr020529.htm

May 29, 2002

Congresswoman Brown Denounces U.S. Department of Justice Decision
(Washington, DC) With regard to the United States Department of Justice's recent comments about the 2000 elections in Florida, ...

[G_j]

1. kick

:kick:

[Stone_Spirits]

2. going back to traditional values?

"Clock turned back on cvil rights"


this is the real story, disgusting

[G_j]

4. people layed down their lives for voting rights

MLK, we have let you down. :-(

[G_j]

3. kick

[Iverson]

5. I mention this kind of stuff all the time, G_j.

However, I think you really need to know why mainstream Dems don't, or don't even respond to your thread.

[Forkboy]

6. Good thing Palast doesn't post on DU

He'd been drummed right out :)

[Sterling]

7. It is obvious why the Bush media ignors it but...

We dDems have no excuse whatso ever. When I hear someone blame Nader I think that person either does not know or care what really happened in 2k.

It is easier to pick on the Greens and Nader as they have no power than really tackle the beast. Just another sign we are living in a culture of denial.

[Sterling]

8. The real irony is that

This is one of the reasons I am glad Nader is in the race. When our party ignors our right to vote I welcome a voice that will champion it for us.

[Q]

9. Headlines: Democrats vow to fight Nader...

- Wow. We didn't see this kind of 'fight' when the 2000 election was outright stolen from us.

[G_j]

10. yup

I wish the sort of outrage we are witnessing towards 'you know who' was directed towards the criminal civil rights violations of 2000.

At risk of sounding inflammatory and using the R word, it could be taken as a subtle form of racism that this story continues to be left on the back burner in terms of people's passion.

[seabeyond]

11. florida voters

i hear that they still havent gotten the names of the people on the list off........that they are still going to not be able to vote. is this true. and has florida fixed there problem. seems to be enough time for them to clarify which person truly cant vote and which can

[alarimer]

12. A vote for Nader was/is a vote for Bush

Nader got 100,000 votes in Florida. The margin of "victory" for Bush when the SC halted the counting was 537. If Nader had not been in the election, Gore would most likely have won, so all the Greens and people who voted for Nader who refuse to lay the blame are in some kind of DENIAL about the facts. NADER is an asshole and needs to QUIT now. He is a loser and all he can do is help "reelect" Bush. All of you people need to wise up and face facts.

[G_j]

13. my question was

what happened to THIS story??


Like it or not, Nader's running was legal.
The voter purge was criminal and was a slap in the face of every person who fought and risked their lives for voting rights.

You repeat something almost verbatim that's been said literally thousands of times here. Fine, but I was trying to garner some discussion about another issue. Among other things, this is a civil rights issue.

[Forkboy]

14. kick

for someone actually looking beyond "Nader is evil".

[G_j]

15. kick

because civil rights is a Democratic principal

[MadHound]

20. Yes, Nader got 100,000 votes in Florida

Yet there were 380,000 registered Democrats, and 190,000 self described liberals who voted for Bush, just to double screw Gore. Why were they so pissed you ask? Mainly because of Gore's dealings with his corporate master BP Oil, whom he had promised to grant off shore drilling rights in the Gulf of Mexico right off of the Florida coast. Oops, I guess you shouldn't piss off your base when you're going to need them.

And actually it now looks like Nader and the Greens helped Gore. From no less a source than Al From, in the DLC house mag Blueprint: " 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."
<http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=179&contentid=2919>

No, there are several reasons why Gore lost Florida and the election. But Nader isn't one of them.

[noiretextatique]

16. i am not surprised by the lack of responses

obviously, this issue is of no more concern to democratic voters than is was/is to democratic candidates :puke:
it's much easier to blame nader than to actually have to stand up for the civil rights of (mostly) african-american voters in florida. :puke:

[G_j]

17. I hear ya n/t

[GreenPartyVoter]

18. Yeah, Dems don't seem to want to tackle that issue for some reason

Would rather beat up Nader.

[wreckz]

19. I WON'T be voting for Nader again!

Four years ago I was a staunch Nader supporter. I even attended 3 Nader rallies in California and sported a Nader bumper sticker on my car. At the time, I saw very little difference between Gore and Bush. I am sure as hell no fan of the two party duopoly either. Gore and Bush both came off like mushy corporate centrists that are simply part of the elitist status quo. Well, at least Bush campaigned as a "centrist". So I saw no real harm in him being elected compared to Al Gore.

In many ways Gore defeated Gore. He couldn't even carry his own home state of Tennessee! In his debates against Bradley and Bush, Gore came off as really arrogant and condescending. Bush on the other hand, came off as some humble folksy guy from the backwoods of Texas who could relate to the average Joe.

In addition, Bush said he was NOT a "nation builder", yet he made a pre-emptive strike on Iraq that so far has cost in excess of $102,000,000,000 and 548 American Lives.

Bush also said he would not touch Roe V Wade unless he could get a good majority of the country to agree with him. Yet, John Ashcroft is now hounding some abortion clinics to turn over some confidential patient records. Just imagine if Bush gets to pick some Supreme Court justices!

Finally, Bush said he was "An uniter, not a divider" and he could "work" with both Democrats and Republicans. However, Valerie Plame , a CIA agent was outed as payback to her husband ambassador Joseph Wilson. That's because Wilson dared to disagree with fabricated "intelligence reports" alleging Niger was attempting to sell uranium to Iraq. So, it is painfully clear that Bush is a divider, not an uniter. Except in the case of uniting much of the country and the world against him!

So after taking my chances with Bush, and now seeing his true colors, I will stand firmly behind the Democrat nominee. That person will likely be an inside the Beltway senator with their share of baggage and flaws. As usual, it will be a choice between the lesser of two evils. However, in this particular presidential election, we are literally talking a contest of evil-lite vs. industrial strength evil!


If Ralph Nader must run, I hope he does so strictly to convey a message about the corporatacracy that has hijacked our country, and takes many parting shots at Bush in the process. But in the very end, I hope he urges whatever "supporters" he may have, not to vote for him, especially in any swing states like Florida or Ohio, for example.


Should Nader once again suck away enough votes from the Democrat candidate , thus allowing Bush to be re-elected, then his progressive legacy will be forever tarnished! He will be remembered more for how he ends his career, versus his past glory that made him so appealing to progressives in the first place. Now if Nader is really just in this for the campaign money, then fine. I will gladly give him a donation NOT to run!

[GreenPartyVoter]

21. Welcome to DU :)