Who has hurt the progressive cause the most: Brock or Nader?

[JohnLocke]

Taking into account their entire lives, which one of these men hurt the progressive cause the most?

[Cha]

1. Why would David Brock "hurt the progressive cause"?

I know who he is, but I think he has only helped...poor guy ..what an evolution he has made. On second thought ..I bet Brock thinks he a lot of restitution to make.

http://www.mediamatters.org

But I can't stand ralph nader since 2000 when he disingenously went around our Country saying bush and Gore were like tweedledum and tweedledee.

[BlueScreen]

3. A whole lotta repentance

Hi Zidzi.

For those of us who remember watching the Senate confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas, it will take a lot more than two books and a website for us to forgot the impact of David Brock's book The Real Anita Hill.

I am actually about 100 pages into Brock's latest book, The Republican Noise Machine: Right-wing media and how it corrupts democracy. It is a fantastic read, a real page-turner for anyone who wonders how we got to a place where Rush and Fox News are the primary "news-givers" in American households.

I am very encouraged that someone as far into the Right as Brock has been able to find his way out of the wilderness, but the damage Clarence Thomas has done to progressivism in this country cannot be underestimated, and David Brock has a lot to do with that, repentance or not.

By the way, www.mediamatters.org is a fantastic site. I have a penchant for self-punishment: I watch Fox News all the time. By the next morning, Brock's site is updated with deconstructions on all the misinformation heard during the broadcast. One could argue that only someone with Brock's unique background with the Right would be capable of such an adroit analysis. He also is a regular personality on Air America radio, for those of you lucky enough to get it on the AM dial.

Cheers,
Sagar

[Sweetpea]

4. I think being gay had a lot to do with it too

Tired of living in denial.

[JohnLocke]

6. I just finished that book.

It is a great book, more specific and personal than Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media, though that is an excellent read also.

[JohnLocke]

2. Kick

[buycitgo]

5. simple: Brock

his stories were the fundament of the VWRC, which impeached WJC, meanwhile besmirching the dem party, making it impossible for Gore to allow Clinton to campaign for him

also allowed Bush etal to deride that admin, appealing to benighted news consumers' emotions, implanting idea of dem immorality, leading to their swallowing of Gore smears, leading to an election close enough to steal, leading to, what, the fourth reich?

[JohnLocke]

7. I disagree.

Brock by himself was not enough to bring Bush to power; Nader, on the other hand, could do that by himself and did not.

[buycitgo]

10. Nader had as much help from the pugs as Brock

AND, they haven't turned their backs on him like they did to Brock, when he had to be honest about Hilary

I see your point about Nader, though, and am convinced he's insane

BUT, he's right about the dem party in so many instances.

what pisses me MOST about them is how they STILL, in an election year do shit like letting that trog from Arkansas on the court, or reFUSE to take up Sibel Edmond's petard.

WTF is up with THAT? that should be huge news, and a great campaigning point, but they won't touch it. what do they have to hide, I wonder? only rational explanation for their lack of involvement.

and then, there's always the black caucus/florida/senate fiasco

please, lord, let there be a viable third party someday

BTW, I'm voting for Kerry if it's close in Illinois.

if it's not, may go Green, in order for them to build to status similar to that in Germany

[alarcojon]

8. Brock has a lot of atoning to do

but he is doing it. He is really deep in the trenches for our side now. Meanwhile, Nader is well on his way to helping Bush to a second term. WTF could be worse than that?

[KG]

9. i'd nominate the dem party.

they've been aiding and abetting the repooks for the last 12 years.

[buycitgo]

11. yah, bra

I just posted to that effect a bit above yours

check it out

[KG]

12. i'd have to disagree somewhat.

can't see how nader has hurt 'the progressive cause' - the dem party hasn't been progressive in 20 years, that's why so many people voted for the green party.

[buycitgo]

13. see post 10

Nader has lost his mind, or has become corrupted/blackmailed by BFEE.

that said, he has done much to bring progressive politics to the point they reached before he flipped his lid.

you can have most of your spineless dems, too, as it seesm they're getting closer to the RNC than ever, and exhibit little spine in daily give and take of the campaign, always talking about how they're going to respond in kind, but RARELY doing so.

when they occasionally do, they APOLOGIZE

WTF??????

[buycitgo]

14. btw........I voted for Nader in 96, as Illinois was safe

we NEED a party to represent us, the vast majority of people for whom there is no representation.

how sick are you all of voting the lesser of two evils?

trite but true, and til things change drastically it's going to be Meet the New Boss, etc.

[JohnLocke]

15. Kick