Where has Nader been the last 3 years?

[ShaneGR]

Seriously, while Democrats have been battling (Sometimes successfully and sometimes unsuccessfully) for the last three years, where has Nader been. So I'm creating a list of events where Nader was AWOL, meaning he made no public comments.

1. The Florida Recount, MIA Nader.
2. Enron and Worldcom, MIA Nader.
3. No Child Left Behind, MIA Nader.
4. Patriot Act, MIA Nader.
5. Iraq War, MIA Nader.
6. CIA Plame-Gate, MIA Nader
7. Battle over confirmation of judges, MIA Nader.
8. Tax Cuts, MIA Nader.
9. The Democratic Primaries, MIA Nader.

I know there are more, but just who does this moron think he is? He thinks he can just sit back for three years of conservative onslaught and suddenly appear like some friggin knight in shining armor? Hey Ralph, we've fretted and argued and done the best we could for the last 3 horrible years. Now suddenly you think you can step in and call us names, tell us we're all wrong and expect us not to hate the soil you walk on?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ALago1]

4. Wow

Congratulations, that was probably the most paranoid-schizophrenic response possible given the topic :)

[ShaneGR]

5. That Hillary stuff is freeper conspiracy garbage

I tend to think Nader wants a prolonged Republican administration because he stands to profit from it. If the Repubs tear down all of the safety standards and environmental protections (THey've already gotten a good start) who do you think will jump in as Mr. Consumer Advocate and try to save the day? He's already invested in Haliburton.

[Catholic Sensation]

9. if you people think this idiot's being serious

I have some stock from Enron to sell you.

[ALago1]

12. Nope

My little smiley is supposed to indicate an "I'm on to you" tone...

[billbuckhead]

2. Enjoying his wealth while middle America suffers

:puke:

[JailForBush]

3. Where have the Democrats been for the past three years?

They got their butts kicked in Campaign 2002. I don't think anyone bothered to remind them there was another election campaign in 2003.

In the meantime, they were too busy whoring for the Republicans to notice that U.S. citizens were losing their jobs and even their lives.

Fortunately, they finally got it together in time to give a spirited performance in Campaign 2004. Oops, I forgot - this campaign has already been reduced to "electability." Nevermind.

[ShaneGR]

7. Whatever

It's amazing to me how much Nader/freeper fans will ignore to serve their own cause, re-electing Bush.

[The Magistrate]

10. As A Point Of Curiousity, Mr. Bush

Do you have any criticism at all for the Republican Party? You have spent a great deal of time and vitriol on Democratic Party office-holders and officials, so you will understand the question is a natural one....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[neverforget]

6. In a room muttering "there is no difference" to himself.

Obviously not living in the real world....

[legin]

8. OK

what about the guy that probably single handedly cost Gore the entire Arab-American vote in 2000.

What are you going to be doing about him ?

5 to 10 threads a day for the next 9 months ?

Or just give him a job in the administration assuming the Dems win ?

[legin]

13. Merip report, fall 2000

Rogues' Gallery
Who Advises Bush and Gore on the Middle East?

<<snip>>

But at present, only one man, Leon Fuerth, seems to exert real influence on Gore's decisions. Fuerth, a one-time foreign service officer and current Cabinet-level foreign policy adviser, prides himself on being a master of discretion. He has described his proper comportment as "nameless, faceless and odorless," since his ideas "belong to the vice president." Fuerth is expected to be national security director if Gore is elected president, and the two men enjoy an unusually close relationship. During President Clinton's cabinet meetings their habit of passing advisory notes to each other become so distracting that protocol was abandoned to let Fuerth sit at the vice president's immediate right. Known for his gruffness, Fuerth has earned in State Department circles the nickname "Darth Vader."

Over the years, Fuerth has consistently encouraged Gore in taking aggressive stands on foreign policy. Fuerth's toughest positions have been with Iraq, Iran and North Korea, places he has privately described as "giant zits on various parts of the body." Fuerth remains firmly unmoved by Iran's attempts at reform, for example. He lobbied fervently for a controversial and expensive plan to transport Caspian Sea oil and gas via a route that will avoid Russia and Iran. In 1998, Fuerth fought unsuccessfully to convince President Clinton to impose sanctions against three foreign companies that were big investors in Iran's energy sector, arguing that to block investment in Iran was worth offending the European Union.

During Gore's run for the nomination in 1988, Fuerth helped him formulate a strongly pro-Israel line.(3) At that time, Gore criticized the Reagan administration for attempting to push Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir into withdrawing from land it occupied in 1967 in exchange for peace with its Arab neighbors. In 1990, after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, Fuerth produced a three-inch-thick binder explaining why Gore should break with other Senate Democrats and vote in favor of going to war. Senator Gore was one of six Democrats to support the war. Fuerth was also a strong advocate for early military strikes against Serbian forces.

Fuerth's outlook on Iraq differs little from that of Bush's advisers. In a recent interview billed as a "gentlemanly discussion," Fuerth clashed on Iraq with Bush adviser Robert Zoellick, former assistant Secretary of State. Their real disagreement, however, was not over whether to use force, but over whose fault -- President Clinton's or President Bush's -- it was that Saddam Hussein was not already dead. The route of diplomacy was not discussed, nor was the option of rigorous military sanctions and enhanced border inspections. Nor did either man mention lifting the economic sanctions that by UNICEF estimates are killing 250 Iraqi civilians a day. Whereas Zoellick has joined his fellow Vulcans in advocating the seizure of Iraqi territory using US air and/or ground forces, Fuerth remains more coy. "Ultimately Saddam Hussein is going to make a mistake that plays into our hands…hat mistake will confer on us the legitimate right to deal with him," remarked Fuerth, adding that such a US response may or may not be coordinated with the Iraqi opposition.

<<snip>>

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer216/216_urbina.html

[WitchWay]

11. Nader, lazy?

Nader, lazy? Ha. You've got to be kidding.
I don't want to post any links, lest I get accused of promoting an opposition party, but if you just google, its easy to see he's been all over all those issues and about 100 more.

[lams712]

14. You are being very disingenuous.....

...Nader was against all of that. He didn't get the media coverage. Also, he's not a member of Congress or anything and couldn't do much of anything about it.

Also, on points 2,3,4,5,6 & 8 a HELL OF A LOT OF DEMOCRATS WERE JOINING IN ON THE FUN!!!! SO STOP BLAMING NADER FOR ALL OF THAT CRAP. Many Democrats, most of them centrists went along with many key elements of BUsh's program.

WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE ON THAT?????


I'll tell you where. That outrage is manifested in Nader's candidacy. That's the main reason why he's running. There's very little difference between the two major parties. The record speaks for itself.

The Democratic Party may have sowed the seeds of it's own destruction. I'd like to believe that the Democratic Party is significantly better than the Republican Party, but seeing the way Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich are treated by the party establishment and the fact that the DLC exists at all tells me otherwise. I plan on supporting the Democratic nominee, but that could change if the party doesn't do some changing on its own.

[RichM]

15. "while Democrats have been battling for the last 3 yrs" -- HAW Ha ha ha

BWWAAHAhahhahahahhaha...

"Battling" -- I get it! Good one!

[jpgray]

17. Democrats named Byrd, Kucinich and Feingold don't ring a bell? (nt)

[RichM]

19. There are about 250 Dems in Congress. A handful have performed

admirably & courageously, including those three. This handful is probably less than 10% of the total, certainly less than 20%. Overall, not a record to be proud of.

[jpgray]

22. 21 Democratic senators voted against the IWR, and 122 representatives

That would be, in each case, well over 20%.

[RichM]

24. The context here was not limited to IWR. It's an overall characterization

of the level of opposition offered by Democrats to what's transpired in the last 3 years. This would have to include acts of omission as well as acts of commission. IOW, being silent in the face of outrages has to be included in the assessment, though it's not readily quantifiable. So the argument would necessarily be somewhat subjective.

One could quibble about the exact numbers, but it's tough to argue that the performance of a great number of Democrats has been better than abysmal & spineless.

[jpgray]

25. There is *plenty* of room for improvement, without question (nt)

[WitchWay]

28. 122 led by DK

That's a leader.

[jpgray]

16. Nader has written many articles and made many appearances

Both of which were similar in form and function to his speeches when running for the presidency--Bush gets a little more time in the hot seat when Ralph isn't running, however. Most of the articles and speeches are actually quite good. I don't like Ralph, however, since he invests in some of the worst corporations known to man. But he HAS been doing stuff, albeit of the low-key and unnoticed variety. Certainly he has not gone all out to fight for the issues you mention.

[greendog]

18. Try this....

http://www.nader.org/

Ralph's been pretty busy these last three years.

Disclaimer: I am not a "Nader Supporter" and do not intend to vote for Nader this November.

[Nicholas_J]

20. Been locked in the trunk of a corvair.

They let him out every once and a while for the corvair's sake.

[Guaranteed]

21. ROFLMAO!

You call that BATTLING???

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

23. Nader was critical on Iraq

but on everything else you are correct. He was MIA.

[retyred]

26. My guess would be

Staying in the Lincoln bedroom!


retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
"The "ONLY" true Democrat from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party"



So I read this book

[Dr Fate]

27. I want some one who can DO somthing, not just talk about it...

...Nader is all talk as of late.

I agree- You cant get much done w/o VOTES/power- and Nader cant seem to get either...

[Piperay]

29. Nader couldn't speak because

his lips were too firmly attached to chimp's ass from kissing :* it so much. :puke: :mad: