Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Ralph Nader's Open Letter to former President George W. Bush: "The Country You Destroyed" [View all]redqueen
(115,113 posts)93. He's got an awful lot of nerve.
Ralph Nader Was Indispensable To The Republican Party
..
During the 2004 election contest, a local AP story from Salem, Oregon, on June 25th, was similarly headlined "Pro-GOP Groups Seek to Aid Nader, Hurt Kerry," and reported, "Two conservative groups [the business-oriented Citizens for a Sound Economy, and the fundamentalist Christian Oregon Family Council] have been phoning people around Oregon this week, ... in hopes of putting Nader's name on Oregon's presidential ballot." Oregon was one of 18 tight "battleground" states in the 2004 Presidential election, and Republicans wanted Nader's name to be on the Presidential ballot in order to draw votes away from Democratic candidate John Kerry, and thus throw Oregon's electoral college votes to Bush, and so make Bush the winner, just as had crucially happened in 2000 in both Florida and New Hampshire. (Here is how Citizens for a Sound Economy explained it to their members accompanying their 27 June 2004 "Phone Script": "Liberals are trying to unite in Oregon and keep Nader off the ballot to help their chances of electing John Kerry. We could divide this base of support" between "the uber-liberal Nader and John Kerry," so as to produce a Republican win.)
The board of directors of one of these groups, the Koch brothers' Citizens for a Sound Economy, happened to have been headed by two longtime personal friends of George W. Bush: the former Republican House leader Dick Armey of Texas, and the former counselor to President G.H.W. Bush, C. Boyden Gray. It's virtually certain that these two men authorized this backroom campaigning for Ralph Nader's candidacy. Mr. Gray was an heir to the Reynolds Tobacco fortune. CSE was financed by the foundations of Richard Mellon Scaife, of the Coors family, as well as of the Koch families, and by the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and the J.M. Olin Foundation. Jane Mayer, on 30 August 2010, headlined in the New Yorker, "Covert Operations" (of the Koch brothers), and wrote: "'Ideas don't happen on their own,' Matt Kibbe, the president of FreedomWorks, a Tea Party advocacy group, told me. 'Throughout history, ideas need patrons.' The Koch brothers, after helping to create Cato and Mercatus, concluded that think tanks alone were not enough to effect change. They needed a mechanism to deliver those ideas to the street, and to attract the public's support. In 1984, David Koch and Richard Fink [whom she called 'the central nervous system of the Kochtopus'] created yet another organization, and Kibbe joined them. The group, Citizens for a Sound Economy, seemed like a grassroots movement, but ... was sponsored principally by the Kochs."
On 5 July 2004, BusinessWeek (p. 53) similarly headlined "Bush Bigs Open Their Wallets For Nader," and reported that among Nader's largest donors was Richard J. Egan, who was a Bush "Ranger," having raised more than $200,000 for his friend, George W. Bush. Egan, whom President Bush appointed Ambassador to Ireland, contributed the maximum allowed, $2,000, to Nader, and Egan's son also did. Unknown other Bush contributors, whom the senior Egan had previously "bundled" into that $200,000+ for Bush, also contributed to Nader. BusinessWeek reported that Richard J. Egan denied being the same person as the Richard J. Egan who contributed to Nader. However, the magazine reported that the Richard J. Egan, whom the records showed to have contributed to Nader, happened to live at the very same address, and that only one Richard J. Egan happened to live there.
...
On July 9th, the San Francisco Chronicle headlined "GOP Doners Funding Nader: Bush Supporters Give Independent's Bid a Financial Lift," and reported that the Nader campaign "has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party," according to "an analysis of federal records." Perhaps these contributors were Ambassador Egan's other friends. Mr. Egan's wife was now listed among the Nader contributors. Another listed was "Nijad Fares, a Houston businessman, who donated $200,000 to the Bush inaugural committee and who donated $2,000 each to the Nader effort and the Bush campaign this year." Furthermore, Ari Berman reported 7 October 2004 at the Nation, under "Swift Boat Veterans for Nader," that some major right-wing funders of a Republican smear campaign against Senator John Kerry's Vietnam service contributed also $13,500 to the Nader campaign, and that "the Republican Party of Michigan gathered ninety percent of Nader's signatures in their state" (90%!) to place Nader on the ballot so Bush could win that swing state's 17 electoral votes. Clearly, the word had gone out to Bush's big contributors: Help Ralphie boy! In fact, on 15 September 2005, John DiStaso of the Manchester Union-Leader, reported that, "A year ago, as the Presidential general election campaign raged in battleground state New Hampshire, consumer advocate Ralph Nader found his way onto the ballot, with the help of veteran Republican strategist David Carney and the Carney-owned Norway Hill Associates consulting firm."
...
On 2 August 2006, Paul Kiel at TPM Muckraker, headlined "GOP Donors Funded Entire PA Green Party Drive," and he reported: "OK, we've done it. We've nailed it down: Every single contributor to the Pennsylvania Green Party candidate is actually a conservative - except for the candidate himself. The Luzerne County Green Party raised $66,000 in the month of June in order to fund a voter signature drive. The Philly Inquirer reported yesterday that $40,000 came from supporters of [Republican] Rick Santorum's campaign. ... Also yesterday, we confirmed that another $15,000 came from GOP donors. ... Today, I confirmed that" the entire remaining $11,000 also did.
....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html
..
During the 2004 election contest, a local AP story from Salem, Oregon, on June 25th, was similarly headlined "Pro-GOP Groups Seek to Aid Nader, Hurt Kerry," and reported, "Two conservative groups [the business-oriented Citizens for a Sound Economy, and the fundamentalist Christian Oregon Family Council] have been phoning people around Oregon this week, ... in hopes of putting Nader's name on Oregon's presidential ballot." Oregon was one of 18 tight "battleground" states in the 2004 Presidential election, and Republicans wanted Nader's name to be on the Presidential ballot in order to draw votes away from Democratic candidate John Kerry, and thus throw Oregon's electoral college votes to Bush, and so make Bush the winner, just as had crucially happened in 2000 in both Florida and New Hampshire. (Here is how Citizens for a Sound Economy explained it to their members accompanying their 27 June 2004 "Phone Script": "Liberals are trying to unite in Oregon and keep Nader off the ballot to help their chances of electing John Kerry. We could divide this base of support" between "the uber-liberal Nader and John Kerry," so as to produce a Republican win.)
The board of directors of one of these groups, the Koch brothers' Citizens for a Sound Economy, happened to have been headed by two longtime personal friends of George W. Bush: the former Republican House leader Dick Armey of Texas, and the former counselor to President G.H.W. Bush, C. Boyden Gray. It's virtually certain that these two men authorized this backroom campaigning for Ralph Nader's candidacy. Mr. Gray was an heir to the Reynolds Tobacco fortune. CSE was financed by the foundations of Richard Mellon Scaife, of the Coors family, as well as of the Koch families, and by the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and the J.M. Olin Foundation. Jane Mayer, on 30 August 2010, headlined in the New Yorker, "Covert Operations" (of the Koch brothers), and wrote: "'Ideas don't happen on their own,' Matt Kibbe, the president of FreedomWorks, a Tea Party advocacy group, told me. 'Throughout history, ideas need patrons.' The Koch brothers, after helping to create Cato and Mercatus, concluded that think tanks alone were not enough to effect change. They needed a mechanism to deliver those ideas to the street, and to attract the public's support. In 1984, David Koch and Richard Fink [whom she called 'the central nervous system of the Kochtopus'] created yet another organization, and Kibbe joined them. The group, Citizens for a Sound Economy, seemed like a grassroots movement, but ... was sponsored principally by the Kochs."
On 5 July 2004, BusinessWeek (p. 53) similarly headlined "Bush Bigs Open Their Wallets For Nader," and reported that among Nader's largest donors was Richard J. Egan, who was a Bush "Ranger," having raised more than $200,000 for his friend, George W. Bush. Egan, whom President Bush appointed Ambassador to Ireland, contributed the maximum allowed, $2,000, to Nader, and Egan's son also did. Unknown other Bush contributors, whom the senior Egan had previously "bundled" into that $200,000+ for Bush, also contributed to Nader. BusinessWeek reported that Richard J. Egan denied being the same person as the Richard J. Egan who contributed to Nader. However, the magazine reported that the Richard J. Egan, whom the records showed to have contributed to Nader, happened to live at the very same address, and that only one Richard J. Egan happened to live there.
...
On July 9th, the San Francisco Chronicle headlined "GOP Doners Funding Nader: Bush Supporters Give Independent's Bid a Financial Lift," and reported that the Nader campaign "has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party," according to "an analysis of federal records." Perhaps these contributors were Ambassador Egan's other friends. Mr. Egan's wife was now listed among the Nader contributors. Another listed was "Nijad Fares, a Houston businessman, who donated $200,000 to the Bush inaugural committee and who donated $2,000 each to the Nader effort and the Bush campaign this year." Furthermore, Ari Berman reported 7 October 2004 at the Nation, under "Swift Boat Veterans for Nader," that some major right-wing funders of a Republican smear campaign against Senator John Kerry's Vietnam service contributed also $13,500 to the Nader campaign, and that "the Republican Party of Michigan gathered ninety percent of Nader's signatures in their state" (90%!) to place Nader on the ballot so Bush could win that swing state's 17 electoral votes. Clearly, the word had gone out to Bush's big contributors: Help Ralphie boy! In fact, on 15 September 2005, John DiStaso of the Manchester Union-Leader, reported that, "A year ago, as the Presidential general election campaign raged in battleground state New Hampshire, consumer advocate Ralph Nader found his way onto the ballot, with the help of veteran Republican strategist David Carney and the Carney-owned Norway Hill Associates consulting firm."
...
On 2 August 2006, Paul Kiel at TPM Muckraker, headlined "GOP Donors Funded Entire PA Green Party Drive," and he reported: "OK, we've done it. We've nailed it down: Every single contributor to the Pennsylvania Green Party candidate is actually a conservative - except for the candidate himself. The Luzerne County Green Party raised $66,000 in the month of June in order to fund a voter signature drive. The Philly Inquirer reported yesterday that $40,000 came from supporters of [Republican] Rick Santorum's campaign. ... Also yesterday, we confirmed that another $15,000 came from GOP donors. ... Today, I confirmed that" the entire remaining $11,000 also did.
....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html
Ralph the Leninist
...
This depraved indifference to Republican rule has made Naders old liberal friends even more furious. A bunch of intellectuals organized by Sean Wilentz and Todd Gitlin are circulating a much nastier open letter, denouncing Naders wrecking-ball campaignone that betrays the very liberal and progressive values it claims to uphold. But really, the question shouldnt be the one liberals seem to be asking about why Nader is doing what hes doing. The question should be why anyone is surprised. For some time now, Nader has made it perfectly clear that his campaign isnt about trying to pull the Democrats back to the left. Rather, his strategy is the Leninist one of heightening the contradictions. Its not just that Nader is willing to take a chance of being personally responsible for electing Bush. Its that hes actively trying to elect Bush because he thinks that social conditions in American need to get worse before they can better.
Nader often makes this the worse, the better point on the stump in relation to Republicans and the environment. He says that Reagan-era Interior Secretary James Watt was useful because he was a provocateur for change, noting that Watt spurred a massive boost in the Sierra Clubs membership. More recently, Nader applied the same logic to Bush himself. Heres the Los Angeles Times account of a speech Nader gave at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., last week: After lambasting Gore as part of a do-nothing Clinton administration, Nader said, If it were a choice between a provocateur and an anesthetizer, Id rather have a provocateur. It would mobilize us.
Lest this remark be considered an aberration, Nader has said similar things before. When (the Democrats) lose, they say its because they are not appealing to the Republican voters, Nader told an audience in Madison, Wis., a few months ago, according to a story in The Nation. We want them to say they lost because a progressive movement took away votes. That might make it sound like Naders goal is to defeat Gore in order to shift the Democratic Party to the left. But in a more recent interview with David Moberg in the socialist paper In These Times, Nader made it clear that his real mission is to destroy and then replace the Democratic Party altogether. According to Moberg, Nader talked about leading the Greens into a death struggle with the Democratic Party to determine which will be the majority party. Nader further and shockingly explained that he hopes in the future to run Green Party candidates around the country, including against such progressive Democrats as Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, Sen. Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, and Rep. Henry Waxman of California. I hate to use military analogies, Nader said, but this is war on the two parties.
...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/ballot_box/2000/10/ralph_the_leninist.html
...
This depraved indifference to Republican rule has made Naders old liberal friends even more furious. A bunch of intellectuals organized by Sean Wilentz and Todd Gitlin are circulating a much nastier open letter, denouncing Naders wrecking-ball campaignone that betrays the very liberal and progressive values it claims to uphold. But really, the question shouldnt be the one liberals seem to be asking about why Nader is doing what hes doing. The question should be why anyone is surprised. For some time now, Nader has made it perfectly clear that his campaign isnt about trying to pull the Democrats back to the left. Rather, his strategy is the Leninist one of heightening the contradictions. Its not just that Nader is willing to take a chance of being personally responsible for electing Bush. Its that hes actively trying to elect Bush because he thinks that social conditions in American need to get worse before they can better.
Nader often makes this the worse, the better point on the stump in relation to Republicans and the environment. He says that Reagan-era Interior Secretary James Watt was useful because he was a provocateur for change, noting that Watt spurred a massive boost in the Sierra Clubs membership. More recently, Nader applied the same logic to Bush himself. Heres the Los Angeles Times account of a speech Nader gave at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., last week: After lambasting Gore as part of a do-nothing Clinton administration, Nader said, If it were a choice between a provocateur and an anesthetizer, Id rather have a provocateur. It would mobilize us.
Lest this remark be considered an aberration, Nader has said similar things before. When (the Democrats) lose, they say its because they are not appealing to the Republican voters, Nader told an audience in Madison, Wis., a few months ago, according to a story in The Nation. We want them to say they lost because a progressive movement took away votes. That might make it sound like Naders goal is to defeat Gore in order to shift the Democratic Party to the left. But in a more recent interview with David Moberg in the socialist paper In These Times, Nader made it clear that his real mission is to destroy and then replace the Democratic Party altogether. According to Moberg, Nader talked about leading the Greens into a death struggle with the Democratic Party to determine which will be the majority party. Nader further and shockingly explained that he hopes in the future to run Green Party candidates around the country, including against such progressive Democrats as Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, Sen. Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, and Rep. Henry Waxman of California. I hate to use military analogies, Nader said, but this is war on the two parties.
...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/ballot_box/2000/10/ralph_the_leninist.html
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
152 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Ralph Nader's Open Letter to former President George W. Bush: "The Country You Destroyed" [View all]
HughBeaumont
Jan 2014
OP
Could you indulge me in writing an open letter of your own to Mr. Nader on this very point? If
ChisolmTrailDem
Jan 2014
#95
Blame yourself, Ralph. Absent your vanity candidacy, Bush would have lost.
Lizzie Poppet
Jan 2014
#90
Democracy doesn't mean you get to turn off your brain to the reality of your political system.
stevenleser
Jan 2014
#10
That might be an argument for settling electoral ties in a different fashion,
winter is coming
Jan 2014
#26
Democracy means that when the system you have isn't working for a majority of the people, the people
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#118
Or the fucked up butterfly ballots that gave thousands of Gore votes to Buchanan
progressoid
Jan 2014
#74
Factcheck.org is wrong about one part, Gore's team did ask for a statewide recount at the end.
stevenleser
Jan 2014
#37
"The reason Nader got any traction at all is because Gore ran a terrible campaign.. "
SomethingFishy
Jan 2014
#28
Bullshit. We don't know whether the Nader voters would have turned out at all
winter is coming
Jan 2014
#13
It was known that it was likely Nader was going to throw the election, before the election
Major Nikon
Jan 2014
#36
You can't "poach" someone else's votes. Votes belong to the voter, not any candidate.
winter is coming
Jan 2014
#65
It's not the figure of speech, but the attitude behind it, that I was decrying.
winter is coming
Jan 2014
#127
I lay it squarely on the Supremes. They went where they had no authority to go but went anyway then
shraby
Jan 2014
#15
Did Ralph Nader forget he helped elect Bush by running his go no where election and.....
DrewFlorida
Jan 2014
#22
I wonder what order of the players gets the blame for the Failure Fuhrer's ascendancy?
HughBeaumont
Jan 2014
#30
I would add the Lewinsky scandal that was still on the radar of many of the idiotic public. Clinton
adirondacker
Jan 2014
#80
Nothing makes me more embarrassed to be liberal than watching liberals trash Nader
NoOneMan
Jan 2014
#45
Ironically the 'he has a big house' accusation was used against Gore by Republicans
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2014
#133
It's funny that you can't forgive Nader for practicing democracy and agree with him
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2014
#132
Nader had a far greater impact on all our lives than anything Pope Francis has done.
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#142
During the impeachment, Bill's approval ratings were higher than Raygun's highest
Major Nikon
Jan 2014
#86
It's like a dinner bell for the 3rd way Nader Haters. Awesome letter, btw and nice donation to the
adirondacker
Jan 2014
#68
When I saw the title, I thought Nader was talking about the United States of America.
calimary
Jan 2014
#96
Nader should'a never picked Lieberman for his running mate...oh, wait..
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jan 2014
#102
I waited and waited every day in the 2000 campaign for Nader to drop out and endorse Gore
bluestateguy
Jan 2014
#114
since he must take most of the blame for the reign of error, where the fuck was he DURING georgee???
pansypoo53219
Jan 2014
#117
Irregardless of him taking votes ...he does say some interesting things worth thinking about.
L0oniX
Jan 2014
#136
Is there any doubt now that CommonDreams is a third party mouthpiece?
great white snark
Jan 2014
#147