Now Nader Claims He Didn't Endorse Edwards

[LoZoccolo]

In testy messages to both of us yesterday Nader denies he endorsed Edwards before the Iowa caucus, asserting that all he did was quote approvingly a phrase of Edwards concerning Hillary Clinton being a corporate Democrat. "We quoted Edward's phrase, We didn't even say who it was, then we went after Hillary. That's not an endorsement I demand a correction."

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn01102008.html

Obviously I don't agree with this column because Counterpunch is like splinterist enemy #1 as far as publications go, and was a source cited by FReeper disruptor seventhson to try to smear Clark during the 2004 primaries, and the article seems to complain that Nader is weak for endorsing Edwards, but it will give you a picture of how Nader dealt with a situation with "testy messages".

[stuartrida]

1. It seems pretty obvious that Nader is most likely to tun against Hillary, and so is Bloomberg.

Who they endorse doesn't mean squat to me.

[applegrove]

2. How could Nader support a Democratic candidate since he thinks

they are all just as bad as any Repuke?

[TheJizzaking]

3. Maybe

because he sees what his running in 2000 did do the country.

[applegrove]

4. He hadn't learnt his lesson in 2004. What makes you think he has learnt

it since then?

[LoZoccolo]

6. He is actually considering another run, and participated in a Green Party debate.

http://www.acgreens.org/news/green-primary-candidates-debate.html

[Bonobo]

5. I think Nader pretty much has this race sewn up anyway. He's inevitable.