Note to PA morons: Albert Gore won the Presidential election in 2000, in spite of massive evote fraud and other underhanded attempts at vote manipulation by the REPUBLICANS and BUSH, not Nader. Every investigation since has proven Gore won Florida, in spite of Nadar exercising his Constitutional right to run for Unitary Decider.

Your anger is misdirected. The country is being ruined by Cheneybush - why not leave Nadar alone and dedicate your efforts to ousting the current regime, like the rest of us.

See what moves Democrats to energetic opposition: a smaller opponent who can be unjustly harassed. But move against their criminal bipartisan buddies!? Perish the thought!

Right on Frank...and, for the record, the way Democrats, using dirty trick tactics, kept Ralph off of many state ballots, mine included (which I observed first hand) has turned me away from the Democratic party forever.

After many many decades of being a 'loyal party member', I now will always vote for 3rd party members I believe in. I see no other way to wake up the 'big boys' in the main two parties.

The Democrats fear alternative candidates because all they have to offer is that they are a micron better than the repugs. The demonization of Nader is wrong but it is also meant to demonize the very idea of independent candidates. Without the possibility of running independently, we are powerless and they will foist rotten corporate candidates on us knowing that many will vote for them. Hillary Clinton makes me want to Ralph.

Right on frank.

This is getting borderline ridiculous. Nader is a champion of democracy, and the quicker these democrats realize their party is of minimal difference to the conservative one, the better off we will be.

This country is being ruined by corporatization of our electoral process, not a Nader/Comejo ticket. Get out of here. Let people vote their conscience. If the Democratic Party can't take advantage of the 90% of the electorate that does not have it in their interest to vote Republican, that is their own fault.

Gawd Democrats are obnoxious.

And its amazing how incoherent this article is. The writer seems far more interested in pushing this Democratic message of hatred than in explaining anything coherent about the court case. I've read this twice now, and still haven't a clue as to what's going on with that.

The very fact that the Democrats work so very, very hard to prevent any alternative appearing on the ballots should be a very big clue as to the true nature of that disgusting party. The message is that the Democrats don't give a damn about what's best for the country or about what makes a democracy truly function. They just want political power and they are willing to do anything, no matter how low and disgusting, to get and keep that power. In that respect, they are exactly the same as the Republicans. The American people should recoil in horror at the idea of electing any representatives or party that places their own interests above that of the nation.

We see this time and time again with the Democrats. When the discussion is on the Iraq war, we see the Democrats basically say that they think the issue can help them in 2008. Thus the last thing the Democrats want is for the war to end before then. The Democrats are such a low, evil and immoral party that they are willing to have thousands of Americans be killed or maimed and many more of Iraqis to suffer the same fate .... as long as it increases their chances to be elected. This is an embodiment of pure evil in the world.

The same goes for impeachment. To the Democrats, their oaths to uphold the Constitution don't matter. What the Constitution and what the law says don't matter. All point to an immediate and dire need for impeachment hearings. To the Democrats, the only thing that matters is what helps them in the next election. They've apparently decided that they are helped more by keeping an increasing dangerous and unpopular president in office more than by a potentially ugly impeachment battle. Again, any American citizen should look at this and recoil in horror at the notion of electing a party that puts it own self-interests above what's best for the nation.

We even saw this in Al Gore in Florida in 2000. There was a clear and principled stand for a candidate in his position to take. That would be to stand up and say that no matter what the outcome, the most important thing is that democracy be protected and that the will of all of the voters of the state of Florida should be acknowledge. Taking this principled stand would have led quickly to a state-wide recount, and today we now that Gore would have been declared the winner of such a recount.

Instead, Al Gore acted just like any other disgusting Democrat and decided that the only thing that was important was to play the game such that he would be the winner. So he tried to only have the heavily Democrat areas recounted. By the time the process had moved along to a state-wide recount, too much time had been lost. So in many respects, there's an irony here in that it was Al Gore's greedy actions to tilt the game into his favor that led to his defeat.

Why is it with Democrats that when they face Republicans they are as meek as mice, but when it comes to Nader and the Greens they are aggressive and viscious. That alone should tell much about the sick and disgusting nature of this political party. When it comes to challenging corporate power, they have no interest in fighting. But when a political force comes onto the scene that wants to take up what the Democrats should be doing, then suddenly the Democrats know how to fight and fight very hard and very nasty.

Put all the pieces together. The Democrats support the war. The Democrats support the corporate trade deals and the laws that send our jobs overseas. The Democrats support Bush's tax cuts and do nothing to either block them at the time nor repeal them now. The Democrats voted with the corporations to keep Americans from purchasing lower-cost meds from overseas. Just this week the Democrats in the House back the right-wing corporate media and blocked the FCC from going back to the Fairness Doctrine.

The Democrats support the corporate agenda completely up and down the line. The only time the Democrats fight is when they see someone else willing to take on the corporations. This should tell anyone and everyone the true nature of the Democratic party.

If you want change, please stop voting Democrat!

if the democrats had fought bush half as hard as they fought nader, they might not have lost their grip on victory (twice!). and if i were a party loyalist, i'd surely want voters to forget that fact and blame a scapegoat.

"T.J. Rooney, chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, said that the mention of Nader's name sent his blood pressure up 50 points. Told of the judgment against Nader, Rooney laughed.

"I think that's great," he said. "You're goddamned right he should pay, and he should go away, because he didn't learn his lesson in 2000."

Now how does this differ from t he criminal arrogance of the Bush Administration? Noam Chomsky is correct, the USA is a one party corporatist state that masquerades as a two party state. The commissar class does not care about democracy but about consolidating their factional power at the expense of the American people. Just because the Bush Admin is so obviously corrupt does not mean the Democrats arent just as corrupt. Do they not love the military industrial complex? Did they not support the crime bills and dismantling government on the backs of the poor to favor the rich in the 1990s? Do they not support nuclear weapons, global hegemony through violence, and Israels crimes? What this article shows is that Democrats are just as contemptuous to democracy as the GOP is. If you believe they are your ticket out of this insanity, you are sadly wrong.

When over 6 million Democrats voted for Bush and less than 2.4 million voted for Nader it seems that it's the Democrats, not Nader, that cost Gore the election.

I am from Jacksonville Florida. In 2000 like in 2004 and presently, Duval County's (Jacksonville) Supervisor of Elections is Republican. In the 2000 Presidential election over 27,000 votes/ballots in Duval ALONE were thrown out with 80% of those "thrown out" votes having been cast in the 4 most Democrat (and black) districts! Since Bush won Duval by 40,000 votes the 27,000 "thrown out" votes would have not changed the county's Presidential outcome so the "thrown out" votes were never recounted!( a recount in Florida is based on a county by county count) A side note... the day after the elections, the 27,000 "thrown out" votes in two boxes disappeared from the Supervisor of Election's office only to be found 2 days later by a local reporter. The "thrown out" ballots were still in their two boxes and were found siting on the counter in the front office area of the Supervisor's of Election !!!
Right there is a story that has never been made national!!!
I voted for Nader and will/would do it again if ANY of the Democrats have Joe Lieberman as their Vice!

I want to know why the Judge that violated Naders rights is still on the bench? I think this is a gross miscarriage of justice. My friend is right about Penn. It is the most screwed up inbred state in the Country.

Just because they wanted to waste their money fighting something which is someones Constitutional Right does not mean they get their money back!

Why didn't they fight to keep Bush off the ballot? Just a butch of political sleeze that can't fight the real fight!

I note that the article doesn't state what laws Ralph Nader allegedly broke. Apparently something to do with signatures, but who collected the signatures? What was their understanding with Nader? Were the signatures actually fraudulent. This has all the earmarks of a witch hunt to my mind.

Hailing from PA, I just sent T.J. Rooney, chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, this:

So, Public citizen #1 is now public enemy #1, is it?
Nader has done more for the citizens of this country than any of you corporate fat cat Dems will ever achieve. Gore ran a lousy campaign and, in addition, many, many factors, including a flown-in mob of Republican operatives preventing a re-count, a criminal Supreme Court, disenfranchised African-American voters, an assortment of intentionally deceptive voting problems, the inability and unwillingness of the Democrats to stand and fight, and the fact that so many willfully ignore—that Gore was forced to run with Clinton's impeachment—and the subsequent Clinton fatigue, on his back, all contributed to the outcome. And just in case you missed it—Gore actually won Florida had all the ballots been counted.
I voted for Gore then—and I would be even more willing to vote for the Gore of today, and I suspect he might find your actions repugnant in a true Democracy. You don't own the right to monopolize our electoral choices with your stranglehold and I resent that the Democrats drum up more opposition to Nader—who is on our side, than you do to the criminal Right that has driven this country into the mud. Makes me wonder whose side you are really on anyway. Winning seems to be about getting aboard that gravy train rather than making a difference.
Continue to harass Nader and I will make it my own personal mission to join the growing chorus of voices condemning you from the base.

I live in Pennsylvania. This isn't surprising. There are a lot of good people here, but there are also a lot of very narrow, small minds. I was initially kind of peeved at Ralph back when he "spoiled" the election. But of course we know who really spoiled it, and we know that even if Gore had received 88% of the votes, the Supreme Court would have given the presidency to Bush. So much for Democracy.

However, as an American citizen, Ralph Nader ought to have had the same rights as any of us to run for the presidency. This is, after all, supposed to be America -- where any (boy) can grow up to be president. Ha! That's a joke!

We need Ralph, and we need more than two parties -- especially since the two we have now are essentially clones of each other. Why is it not possible to have a third party candidate in America? Or many candidates? Isn't it kind of pathetic that we have lots of choices at Baskin Robbins, but not when it comes to choosing the people who'll be our representatives in matters of life and death?

As a Pennsylvanian-of-late, this reprehensible behavior by Pennsylvania democrats just represents the profoundly backward, profoundly undemocratic nature of this populous, so-called "Commonwealth". As someone who worked hard for Nader in '00 shortly after moving to Pittsburgh, I never imagined I'd be entering such backwardnessness and hostility to real democracy when I moved accross the Mason Dixon line. My former home of Lexington, Kentucky is progressive paradise compared to here.

Pennsylvania's fascist ballot-access rules are practically engineered to preserve the two party duopoly. Public transit and infrastructure crumble while the solution - graduated income taxes and local tax on investment income, as well as payroll, are prohibited by the state constitution. Even a small tax on alchoholic beverages - to save our public transit, get savaged by out neanderthal "business community" - largely because it would go to transit. Ditto a living wage ordnance; ditto a restaurant smoking ordnance.

Meanwhile, it's insular politicians, many of which seem have hardly traveled outside of Pennsylvania in their lives, seem utterly clueless to the cause of the state's bankruptcy.

Here in the Pittsburgh/Allegheny county, a patchwork of tiny school districts - rather than a single county-run school system like civilized states use - assures racist white-flight and savage inequalities for our region's children.

What a shame, because Pittsburgh would have a lot going for it - from it's working-class heritage to compact neighborhoods that could be vibrant models for car-free, culture-rich, but ungentrified livability. The democrats - both local and national are all sell-outs and can go to hell!

They say that 75% of the Democrats are corrupt and 95% of the Republicans are corrupt. Those numbers seem about right.

I'm from the "inbred" state of PA. I switched from Democrat to Independent some years ago. I also voted for Nader in 2000 as a write in candidate.

I will vote for the 25% honest Democrats and the 5% honest Republicans if only there were some in this state.

This just goes to show how un-democratic the Democratic party is. The realy funny thing is that Gore carried PA with out any issue. I made the mistake of wasting my vote for Kerry in '04. I will never waste another vote for a candidate I do not agree with. If everyone in the USA would vote for the third party candidate of their choice in 2008, then we might start to see some real change.

How many signatures were required to get Gore on the Ballot (or Bush for that matter). This corrupt game is rigged the interests that own the "2 parties" to keep real democracy at bay.

If we are ever to be able to have legitimate elections in this country again, we need to get rid of the rigged trackless electornic voting machines, we need to get rid of the electoral college, we need to get rid of the party districts and the gerrymandering, we need to get rid of laws which favore any partys and we need to get rid of private funding and open up the airwaves to all candidates equally.

doll wrote...

"I also voted for Nader in 2000 as a write in candidate..."

Do you mean in 2004? We did get Nader on the PA ballot in 2000. And in 2004, he was on the absentee ballots, but not on the election-day ballot.

Ok, I am with the rest of you. This article is confusing, not to mention poorly written. First of all, it obviously is a political witchhunt crafted by the Dimocratic Party. Second, if Nader failed to turn in the 25,000+ ballots (where is the evidence that declares them fraudulent?), to my mind, he did not make the ballot. Please forgive me if I do not understand the finer points of the rules of running for political office, but if he did not make the ballot, he cannot be held accountable, and therefore, Dimocrats, you are out $70k. That is YOUR misfortune, not his! Too bad! I am not sure what legal statute would hold him accountable for that?? Clearly at the very least, it is coercion, political railroading, and disgusting politics. How sad.

What is the problem? In a democracy anyone can run, ANYONE, even me without any experience at all. Perhaps they'll just vote for me because I have a good sense of humor, big tush, or any other stupid reason, which is how too many people vote anyway. Yeah, If anyone votes for me so be it. That's what real democracy is about. I chuckled with delight when a child star and about 135 candidates ran against Arnold in CA. Whether I liked any of them, it surely was their right to run.

If Nader was able to get any votes it was obviously because he offered something that the other candidates didn't. I didn't vote for him, but I hadn't awaken from the matrix at that time. Even so, even then because I believe in democracy, I knew that people had the right to vote for whomever they wanted. Now I am no longer sleep walking I wish I had voted for Nader. Wake the F up!!!

You either believe in democracy or you don't. You can't have it both ways. Yeah, I believe in your right to choose as long as you choose as I do.

As many things that the democrats and republicans have close in common, the one area that they are completely united is that they want to keep out all independents.

Wow, Nader has been the cause of Bush getting elected and now also for Florida's recount. How about Global warming? Hasn't he done that too? Too incredible!!!

Media Control
Noam Chomsky
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, March 17, 1991
Excerpted from the Alternative Press Review, Fall 1993

...Let me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy. One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free....

An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing of their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy, but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception....

This selfish and anti-democratic attitude of Democrats is exactly why Nader is more relevant than ever. Like others, this demonization was the last straw for me and I adamantly fight for our right to vote for independent candidates. Rooney's rants are more than just despicable, they are emblematic of our democracy woes, going to the root. Both the Dems and the GOP represent the ruling class interests - they do NOT represent the people in general. Rooney's pissed off because Nader continues to defy the illegitimate self-invested authority of both corporate parties, not because he tilts an election one way or the other. The fact remains: Bush stole the election, and the Dems didn't fight it. If all those Dem voters had voted for Nader, he could have won. And he sure as heck would have put up more of a fight against Bush.

The Democrats are a lost cause, only surpassed by those who continue to believe they represent the interests of the people.

I personally have "always" admired Ralph Nader. He alone has done much for American's rights and for consumer protection,___ and not just in the auto industry.

However, had he not run for the office of presidency, a recount in Florida would have never even have been necessary. Gore would have won in Florida and Bush would have been cutting brush on his ranch full time.

Pennsylvania should initiate a national trust fund for Nader for the good he's done. Of course there we are speaking of a race of people who boooo-ed Santa Claus and elected a Mayor of Philadelphia, who used a massive bomb in a city neighborhood to nab a few crazy criminals. He blew up the entire block___ got the bad guys though. Rahh-rahhh-BOOM-rahhh.

These bozos used the argument that a 3rd party would wreck the government because of incompetence.

Nader would of never been able to make major changes the way Bush has.

claudius,

It has to do with Pennsylvania's ballot-access laws. A major party is allowed to sue a minor party the legal and admisistrative costs of challenging their ballot petitions, if they end up not having enough signatures!

Ralph Nader is a national treasure. Many, many, many of the consumer protections we now take for granted can be credited to this man. Only in America could he be pilloried from the so-called "left", as if the Democrats represent the left. If these idiots wanted to do something worthwhile, they could start by dismantling the electoral college, which is a travesty. Al Gore won the popular vote (and probably won Florida too and therefore the electoral vote), but the election was stolen. Last word: Al Gore did not even carry his home state! Is that Ralph Nader's fault?

I'm from PA also and maybe you might want to read this:

http://lvdem.blogspot.com/2006/12/tj-rooney-out-door.html

some quotes
"Make no mistake, I'm not really sad to see Rooney go. I think he was one of the leaders happy to do business behind closed doors. If you wanted good open government, Rooney was not your man. But the guy knows politics."

T.J. Rooney is not running for office any more.
And the writer thinks Rooney will work next for one of the gambling corporations (the Sands) planning to set up in Bethlehem PA with their slot machines etc.

Bethlehem is a wonderful little town with colleges and churches, but it has vacant land with rusting steel factories right between two colleges (Lehigh University and Moravian College) and in the center of town. Thats where they will put the gambling halls.

It will kill Bethlehem. Would you pay $30,000+ a year to send your child to a college that had gambling casinos a few blocks away?

And that location has a train line that isn't in full operation. What should have been done was to rebuild the trains going into NYC and in to Philadelphia. Then Bethlehem would have had communters moving in. Instead they will have busloads of gamblers.

The shallow values of America.

And a broken two party system and almost no way to get a third party.

If you know the film "A Wonderful Life" you will know what I mean when I write: We live in Pottersville.

"and elected a Mayor of Philadelphia, who used a massive bomb in a city neighborhood to nab a few crazy criminals. He blew up the entire block___ got the bad guys though."

While they certainly were a neighborhood nusiance, the MOVE members were hardly "crazy criminals".

But Rendell still carries his hatred for Mumia onward...

A major party is allowed to sue a minor party the legal and admisistrative costs of challenging their ballot petitions, if they end up not having enough signatures!

he said, and the court reporters, stenographers and handwriting experts Grail used to buttress the case were costly.

If you don't pay enough who knows, the hand writing expert might just be in a hurry to get to a job that does!

On second thought, they would only have to call some numbers to conferm that the signitures were valid.

Go GREEN!

I am so proud to have voted for Nader in '00 and am embarrassed to say I caved and voted for Kerry in '04 (not that he wouldn't have been better than Bushor other Dims ....just that my vote was out of fear). Pennsylvania Democratic leaders offer yet another piece of evidence that I'm justified in my feelings, even if it's only a drop in the ocean.

FINALLY! The word is OUT about the backward and oppressive political machine in Pennsylvania.

The truth of the matter is that the Democratic Party in PA is constantly on a witch hunt for any progressive party or individual running for state level offices to stop them in their tracks. It became apparent after the 2000 election and reared its ugly head once again in 2004 when Nader as an Independent was again taken to court by the Dems to stop him from getting on the PA ballot. But it didn't stop there. All of the Green Party candidates for state level offices as well as the Green candidate for US Senate were subsequently squashed in court by the same Democratic Party. Why? Because progressive candidates bare the false and corrupt platform of the Democratic Party in PA when they run on issues voters are interested in. With a seemingly endless supply of money as their tool, they drag any well meaning individual or third party into court to undergo a long and expensive counting of ballot signatures. This last election, because of PA's archaic laws, any corporate candidate of the Dem or repub party needed only 2000 signatures to run a state level campaign. The third parties and independent candidates??? OVER 67,000 signatures EACH were needed!!!! That figure is correct, you're not reading it wrong.

Ballot access laws in PA are some of the worst if not THE worst in the country, designed and implemented solely to keep every election a two party corporate show for votes. It is disgusting that anywhere in this country, democracy is so blatantly held hostage as in the unfair state ballot access laws and this more than any other issue should be in the forefront of progressives' struggle for political justice! The Democratic Party must be exposed for what it is!

See this link for the whole story of PA's unfair ballot access law from the Green Party's experience in 2004!

Pennsylvania land of Prisons and Casinos. A great place to raise your kids.

Reading these comments really cheered me up. I expected at least a few comments from Democrats brimming with misplaced fury and vindictiveness toward Nader.

Nader may well have the character flaws ascribed to him by his numerous detractors; I haven't researched his life. But I totally agree with those who have commented that his "crime" is that he dared to run for president.

It's obvious from outside the partisan Democratic bubble that their bitter grudge against Nader is just part of their collective defense mechanism. They refuse to see that they keep nominating uninspiring mush-mouths with a knack for blowing a sure thing. If the nominees have any true character and charisma, as Al Gore has displayed when he ISN'T a candidate, it's effectively suppressed by their handlers when the nominee is in Campaign Mode.

Nader's just a convenient scapegoat.

PJD,

Thanks for the clarification. That is a ridiculous law!

Every time I read a new article about the U.S. political system I shudder. This is not a democracy, the U.S. is a fascist state disguised as a democracy.

Just to highlight PA's electoral problems I toook the liberty of placing part of the link here in case anyone didn't click on it. As you will see, it even brought negative reactions from the international community!!!

"The Green Party, and their Gubernatorial candidate Marakay Rogers, who is the named plaintiff in the case, found the number to be excessive and unnecessary and led the charge to sue the state. The case had been lost at the circuit court and a request for a rehearing was made on September 5, 2006. The 3rd Circuit's recent decision shows just how difficult it is for challengers in Pennsylvania to get their voices heard.

This situation was so egregious, it attracted the attention of the international human rights organization the Helsinki Accords, which singled out Pennsylvania for a particularly undemocratic ballot access laws.

The Green Party of Pennsylvania now plans to take this case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Said Rogers, "Pennsylvania does a great disservice to voting rights by limiting voter choice. No other state in our country is as afraid of multiple candidates on the ballot as ours. The state's defense is that voters might be confused -- which is an insult to Pennsylvania's voters. No other state fears that voters would be unable to choose from a list of more than two candidates."

According to John Murphy who represents the independent candidacy of Nader/Camejo to the Pennsylvania Ballot Access Coalition (PBAC), "there are two ways to destroy democracy. One is by preventing people from voting, the other is by preventing worthy candidates from ever appearing on the ballot. In 2006 the Democratic Party chose the latter method"."

This is ridiculous revisionism -- Ralph Nader cost no one the election. It was a 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court that appointed Caligula Bush.

The "confused voter" argument - what a hoot! If they would go to any real democracy on earth, they would see that ballots often have at least a dozen parties on the ballot!

The problem with the Democrats is that they CAN'T run a candidate with 'true character.' Only candidates that are devoid of character can possibly combine the backing of a pro-war, pro-corporate rule agenda (as required by those who finance and run the party) and still stand up and lie to audience after audience by pretending to be someone who actually cares about the people and issues that make up the base of the Democratic Party. To be acceptable to the elites that run the Democratic Party, a candidate must not have a 'true character.'

You will see Democrats with 'true charisma.' Bill Clinton was certainly one. He combined this with an amazing ability to lie and get people to trust him at the same time. So Bill Clinton could go around and talk to left\liberal\progressive voters and make them believe that he really believed in what they believed in. Then he'd go back to the White House and govern as a center-right, pro-war, pro-corporate rule President.

All this means is that even if you hear a Democratic candidate that sounds good and says the right things, then you still shouldn't vote for them because its very likely they are lying to you.

The voters might get 'confused' and accidentally vote for a party or candidate that isn't certified as 'corporate-safe'. That's what must be prevented at all cost. Gawd forbid that someone might actually get elected who didn't believe in government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations.

Hi all,
This is NOT what democracy looks like! Call, write or e-mail your expressions of outrage to:

PA Democratic Party E-mail: nick@padems.com
Mailing Address: 300 N. 2nd St., 8th Floor, Harrisburg, PA 17101
Phone: (717) 920-8470

PA Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation:
E-mail: RA-BCEL@state.pa.us
Mailing Address: 210 N. Office Building,Harrisburg, PA 17120
Phone: (717) 787-5280

And even though Ralph can afford to pay the judgment, I just sent him $10 (hey, I'm a poor man) with the notatation on my check reading "Pennsylvania Shakedown," as a symbolic gesture of my outrage. If you'd like to do the same:

Ralph Nader
P.O. Box 19312
Washington, DC 20036

MORE VOICES, MORE CHOICES! DOWN WITH THE DUOPOLY! IRV NOW!

And by the way, I'd recommend visiting http://switch2green.org/.
Isn't it the time for a change in politics as usual?

this says all you need to know about the democrats.

Claudius - good point!

Even within the party itself, Pennsylvania democrats they work hard to squash progressive candidates.

Here in Republican Tim Murphy's District, the party deliberately sabotaged the candidacy of Tom Kovach - a working class populist with solid command of kitchen-table issues, and through very suspicious primary voting patterns, nominated a useless gen-x yuppie named Chad Kluko. Klko then prodeeded to run NO campaign - you couldn't even get a yard sign - to assure fellow business-buddy Murphy got re-elected.

The Republicans are the party of nightmares, but the democrats are the crushers of hopes and dreams. Which is worse?

The Democrats' leadership has lost their senses again and again over the poor showing of candidates that rank and file Democrats are forced to support.

Perhaps, if the Democrats were to expend the effort to field candidates that really represent the common American then it would not matter who else was on the ballot.

When the Democrats want to keep any candidate off the ballot, it makes me sure that they do not support democracy.

I do not know if you all remember when several new democratic candidates last year were running for office when the higher-ups in the Party gave them the command to stop campaigning? To me, that was a significant indicator of how rotten the Party has become.

Whenever you read "There is no question" be prepared to swallow propoganda. Nader did not help Bush get elected. Bush wasn't elected. The Democratic Party is as bad and maybe worse than the Republicans for being spineless hypocrites. Ralph Nader as a private citizen has provided many things we accept as normal such as seatbelts, food labels, prescription drug labels, and whistle blower protection. Imagine what he could do as President.
I strongly urge everyone to watch "An Unreasonable Man".
If my vote doesn't get Kucinich elected, Nader is my next choice.

For more of my Modern Musings.
Help support progressive change

Let me get this straight, the Dems can blame the Greens, the Greens can blame the Libertarians, the Libertarians can blame the anarchists, and the anarchists can blame the Rethugs. The Rethugs can blame the Dems. People, I think we have a circus here.

Last I checked, the number of eligible voters in '00 that didn't bother voting for anyone outnumbered those who voted Green by like a factor of 3-5. In any case, the Green Party is a party based on values (TKV), the DP is not. Why should anyone feel compelled to vote against his own values for the Democratic "We can't challenge Bush because..." Party?

The Dems are little more than Rethug apologists these days. Republicrats all of them.

Blame somebody else for your (Democrats) lack of getting out the vote (With the criminal help of Republican operatives).

Nader has/had every right to run. He has done more for all of us then any candidate that has run in the past 23 years (Thank you for your service 'Jimmy').

Corporate Democrats and Republicans just want the Sand Box ($$$) to themselves, that is why there is very little difference between them.

I couldn't vote for Nader in Oregon in 2006 because of the Democrats.

Get a clue People, we need strong, Elected, Independent representation to right this ship. The two party system is broke!

A KNESAL 'Liberal Warrior' ......... "Little Beirut"

Gore lost becauseof Gore.. I'm sick of people blaming Gore's loss on Nader. If Gore had had a backbone he may have adopted Nader's stances on some of the key issues and he may have won. But it was Gore who blew it -not Nader.If people had voted their hearts instead of their fears Nader may have even won. I don't know how many people told me that they wanted to vote for Nader but were opting to vote for Gore because they were so afraid that Bush would win.

I'm really tired of the Democratic Party's sense of entitlement. They feel they were entitled to the votes Nader got and they always like to whine that Nader cost them the election. I voted for Nader in 2000 and while he has since really turned me off, this sense of entitlement on the part of the Democratic Party also really puts me off. Furthermore, Nader earned my vote by addressing the issues that concerned me; the Democrats did not. It almost doesn't even matter to me who runs anymore, I'll just vote for one of the third party candidates just to avoid the GOP and the Dems. One day, I hope the Dems learn they don't get certain votes because of their own actions (or non-action, as the case may be), not because people like Nader have the courage to challenge the status quo two-party system that only somewhat still resembles democracy. And when all is said and done, they had two choices back then: to go as far as possible in challenging and ensuring the validity of the 2000 election results or sit back and whine about Ralph Nader. Unfortunately for them, they chose the latter.

T.J. Rooney says of Nader: "You're goddamned right he should pay, and he should go away, because he didn't learn his lesson in 2000." Apparently, neither did the Democrats (though, ironically, it seems Al Gore has). And they will probably end up paying.