Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Former Green Party Lt. Governor candidate responds to CBC- Re: Nader

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 03:28 PM
Original message
Former Green Party Lt. Governor candidate responds to CBC- Re: Nader
“We respect your right to run, Mr. Nader. Withdraw.” - Elijah Cummings,
chair of the Congressional Black Caucus of the United States House of
Representatives


To Rep. Cummings and members of the Black Caucus,

You demanded independent candidates Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo
withdraw from the presidential race in favor of NAFTA approving, Iraq
invading, Afghanistan bombing, Sudanese pharmaceutical plant bombing,
right-wing Israeli prime minister and convicted murderer Ariel Sharon
supporting, impeachment of George W. Bush for the forced removal of
democratically elected President Jean Bertrand Aristide refusing, and
mandatory minimum sentencing supporting - John Kerry.

Kerry’s contempt for human rights, international law, arms control and
the United Nations is unforgivable.

“Anyone but Bush” was your cry when Nader and Camejo visited your
offices in late June. But let’s be honest - when Bush delivered lie
after lie after lie during his state of the union addresses, it was the
Democrats who stood and clapped. The Democrats made the monster George Bush!

You don’t challenge the Democrats and Republicans in their abdication of
our communities, but you challenge Nader and Camejo for fighting for our
communities. During your meeting, you condemned Nader for choosing
Camejo, who speaks Spanish fluently, because you fear Malcolm X’s friend
will take away your brown votes!

Peter Camejo changed the minds and hearts of Californians to oppose
California’s horrendous Three Strikes law during his campaign for
governor. Three Strikes imprisons African Americans 12 to 1 for every
white person for the same non-violent crime.

What have you done for us?

Does it matter to you that your constituents are hurt by redlining,
lead-based paint poisoning, predatory lending, pay day loan rackets, and
dirty meat? It matters to Ralph Nader.

Does it matter to you that student Nader challenged Harvard University
when they published the lie that Blacks are inferior to whites? It
matters to me.

Does it matter to you that only Nader campaigned in Ward 8 of the
District of Columbia, exposing that 65,000 people live without a single
supermarket, yet the District of Columbia has had Black mayors and a
Black city council for the last 35 years? It matters to your constituents.

What are you afraid of? That Nader and Camejo may “mess up your little
party” because they advocate for Black Americans and you don’t.

“Anyone but Bush” is your mantra. But even if Bush self-destructs, how
can you support John Kerry without demanding a mandate? Corporate
interests pull the Democrats 24 hours a day. Without a mandate to pull
John Kerry in a progressive direction, there’s no way you can demand equity.

You told Ralph Nader you wanted him out of the race so Bush can’t
appoint another right-winger to the Supreme Court, but let’s look at the
record.

- Kerry promises to appoint anti-abortion judges while professing to
protect a woman’s right to choose.

- The Senate Democrats confirmed right-wing Supreme Court Judge Antonin
Scalia 98-0. Not one Democratic senator, including Gore, opposed Scalia.

- The Democrats could have blocked right-wing Supreme Court Judge
Clarence Thomas’ confirmation - they were in control of the Senate - but
11 Democrats moved across the line to confirm Thomas 52-48 while Senate
Majority Leader George Mitchell sat in his office twirling his thumbs.

You don’t stop anything that hurts us!

- You could have filibustered the tax cut for the wealthy, but you didn’t.

- You could have demanded gas efficient car engines, but instead you
sanctioned the SUV and gave the auto companies an eight-year holiday
without requiring better gas efficiency.

- You could have opposed genetically engineering foods, the petroleum
industry, and the WTO, but you didn’t.

- You could have opposed the federal crime bill which imprisons drug
addicts for the drugs our government allowed to flow into the inner
cities, but you didn’t.

- You could have opposed the “leave no child behind high stake multiple
testing fraud,” but instead you chose to sacrifice our children.

- You could have said “no” to the Patriot Act, but you didn’t.

You don’t represent me!

In 2000, Congressman Julian Dixon sold me out like a $2 dollar whore
when, as ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, he announced
the CIA was not complicit in the destruction of the inner cities by
crack cocaine. I’m tired of being sold out like a $2 dollar whore by
Black people living the good life as my representative in our nation’s
capitol.

Thomas Paine said in the 1700s: “If there must be trouble, let it be in
my day, that my child may have peace.” Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo are
voices taking on the trouble of our day so that we and future
generations may have peace.

Get off your knees and demand the Democrats stop sabotaging the
Nader-Camejo Campaign. Demand Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo be included
in the debates. Don’t go down like a punk. Remember the ancestors and
stand tall!

Sincerely,

Donna J. Warren, a constituent

Donna J. Warren is the Green Party candidate for lieutenant governor of
California in 2002. She sued the CIA and the Department of Justice in
1998 for their complicity in the destruction of South Central by crack
cocaine. She may be reached at cottry@sbcglobal.net.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Caution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. my reply to Donna
Stick it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. and spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DontTreadOnMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. Nader Must Go!
Edited on Fri Jul-16-04 03:38 PM by DontTreadOnMe
The phrase "anyone but Bush" really means "anyone -- but Bush -- who has a realistic chance of winning the election!" What part of the "realistic" polls does Nader NOT understand? Nader's legacy will not be about helping consumers, but as an egotistical spoiler. What a shame...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. hear, hear!
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. Blah blah blah
Facts:

1) Nader can not and will not win.

2) Nader will steal more votes from Kerry/Edwards than Bush. Spare me the propaganda about how "independent" he is - pissed off conservatives will go towards Bednarik before Nader.

3) Given 1 & 2, it follows that if Nader gets enough support, as Mz. Warren wants, Bush will win.

4) Bush is no friend to blacks.

CONCLUSION: Voting for Nader this time is voting for Bush, unless you live in a solid GOP state like Utah, or Indiana, or Texas, and you forfeit the right to complain for the next four years if Bush is elected. You helped it happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seven Donating Member (22 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
29. I'm interested...
...in how Nader is going to "steal" votes.

Seems to me if the guy "can not and will not win", we don't have to worry too much about him breaking into the ballot booths and polling stations, stealing paper ballots and remarking them, rigging the electronic system in his favor or arming a militia of thugs to force people to vote for him at gun point.

But then I could be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. Well her premise falls apart here:
Edited on Fri Jul-16-04 04:53 PM by mzmolly
NAFTA approving, Iraq invading, Afghanistan bombing, Sudanese pharmaceutical plant bombing, right-wing Israeli prime minister and convicted murderer Ariel Sharon supporting, impeachment of George W. Bush for the forced removal of democratically elected President Jean Bertrand Aristide refusing, and mandatory minimum sentencing supporting - John Kerry.

What a total crock.

These people are as looney as the Right Wing. Everything is black and white in both worlds. :crazy:

Same song, different station. Next...

Flame away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. True.
Another "Lefter than Thou" type. They can be just as annoying (but usually a lot more harmless), as their RW counterparts). Hate the way things are going? Support Nader and you can be assured things won't change. Rather counter-intuitive if you ask me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. Let's hear what Kerry said about Sharon and Bush on the I/P conflict
May I remind all of you that the ABB coalition will come to an end the day after Election Day!

I don't want to hear any bullshit about supporting "our Democratic President" even when his policies mirror Bush's.

Our ABB commitment begins and ends with our votes against Bush!

Meet the Press (NBC News) - Sunday, April 18, 2004

MR. RUSSERT: On Thursday, President Bush broke with the tradition and policy of six predecessors when he said that Israel can keep part of the land seized in the 1967 Middle East War and asserted the Palestinian refugees cannot go back to their particular homes. Do you support President Bush?

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

MR. RUSSERT: Completely?

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. I totally agree.
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 01:35 PM by mzmolly
"May I remind all of you that the ABB coalition will come to an end the day after Election Day!

I don't want to hear any bullshit about supporting "our Democratic President" even when his policies mirror Bush's.

Our ABB commitment begins and ends with our votes against Bush!"


Kerry's feet need to be held to the fire, or we'll put up an alternative in 2008.

Here is more on Kerry's statement from the intereview:

" If you're going to have a Jewish state, and that is what we are committed to do and that is what Israel is, you cannot have a right of return that's open-ended or something. You just can't do it. It's always been a non-starter. I personally said that at a speech I gave to the Arab community in New York at the World Economic Forum. I've said that. I've also said that it is realistic because we know that at Taba they negotiated the annexation of certain territory. So it's really stating a reality.

What this administration has not done that it needs to do, what we need is a diplomacy that is ongoing and engaged with the Arab community in order to help to create and help emerge the kind of entity that will provide a peaceful resolution to this. Israel has no partner, no one to be able to negotiate with today. I think the United States and this administration could have done a much more effective job of helping that to emerge, but they were completely disengaged. I will not be disengaged."


FWIW, Kerry has also said he is committed to a Palestinian state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. How can you claim to support long term change
when your actions are all about noise, and promiss stagnation inplace of change?

You can't be about a peaceful future when your campaign gaurantees that the fascists of the present remain in power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinanator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. here's to tomorrows fascists!
salud!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noiretextatique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
10. i agree with her
Edited on Sat Jul-17-04 03:28 PM by noiretblu
call for participation in the debates. she also makes some excellent points about democratic enabling of the neo-con agenda, which is a concern i share. not to mention the issues she raises about poverty, the cia/crack connection, and the increase in the prison population because of the war on drugs and mandatory sentencing.
too bad the greens (or any third party) aren't a viable option yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. The American Greens have failed like their German counterparts
The German Greens dropped their opposition to the war in Iraq the moment they were welcomed into the governing coalition.

Let's recognize that the Greens are mainly a bourgeois party with little interest in challenging the status quo except on the margins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Very true.
Let's recognize that the Greens are mainly a bourgeois party with little interest in challenging the status quo except on the margins.

Just thought that needed to be repeated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noiretextatique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. i do...and the alternative?
is...____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Red
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 01:03 PM by IndianaGreen
The alternative is to vote Red.

Spanish voters were given a real choice, not an echo, between a prowar party and a socialist antiwar party. Socialist leader Zapatero kept his campaign promise and withdrew Spain's troops from Iraq within days of his becoming Prime Minister.

Can you imagine an American politician from the duopoly doing what Zapatero did?

If you want peace and if you oppose imperialism in all of its permutations, the answer does not lie in the same old bankrupt solutions of the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noiretextatique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. vote like the red states?!?!
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 01:04 PM by noiretblu
:7 just kidding...thanks for the suggestion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I updated my message
:hi: noiretblu

We don't have a Liberal Democrat alternative in America as our friends in the UK have, so we must make one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noiretextatique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. thanks, IG
i agree with you :hI: which party do you suggest...i know there are a few.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. We must support the real progressive candidates
candidates like Cynthia McKinney who, once again, is being opposed by the same sordid alliance of rightwing and ultra-Zionist interests.

I think the Socialist Equality Party is making a stand for democratic rights in local elections in Illinois and elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seven Donating Member (22 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #12
30. Very true about the Greens
They are basically a party of leftist guilt victims and Democratic outcasts who don't really care to do much in the way of real reform outside of electoral issues (which is funny, because that is the ONE area, where I don't think they can even have a serious influence).

This is by no means an apologetic for the Dems, who as a whole have been abyssmal, but the CBC has more legit progressive to the core folks in it's ranks than the top of the Green Party heirachy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
13. Well Donna, you and the other 2% of flake Repuke apologists can
screw off.

I really don't care what you Republicans think, and (just in case you lie about this and say that somehow you represent "democracy") neither do the vast majority of Americans. You don't represent anyone but disgusting indifferent slime ball CNN corporate whore Bechtel owning, millionaire repuke apologizing fraudlent embezzling money-making-off-Bush-in-power navel gazing incoherent self absorbed mirror kissing corruption hiding worker exploiting strike-breaking extreme right wing ignoring Cheney sucking women hating paranoid distorting pig of a thief, Ralph Nader. (Did I leave anything out about the Repuke liar?) Even if you get as much as you did last time, which was, in case you can't count, almost as close to zero as Nader applauding Nazi Pat Buchanan, you will not count. The combined Republican Cheney-Nader-Bush-Camejo vote is still going to come in at way, way, way, way less than 45%, I'm guessing less than 40%.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noiretextatique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. nothing in her statement
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 12:02 PM by noiretblu
suggests (even remotely) that she supports republicans. in the end, she just calling for nader and camejo to be included in the debate. wby does the mere mention of participation in the debate (democracy) threaten so-called democrats so much? if kerry is the best candidate, he should prevail. unless of course he sighs when bush speaks or wears earth tones :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
23. What a petty foolish tin-foil hatter
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 02:00 PM by zulchzulu
"Kerry promises to appoint anti-abortion judges while professing to protect a woman’s right to choose."

WTF? That's a goddamn lie. I hear Naderdroids say crap like that occasionally...they usually are too cowardly or stoned to explain where they heard or read their claim.

As for the other issues, she apparently has little understanding of the nuances or Kerry's record. Granted, he's not GOD like St. Ralph The Perfect, but he's our best chance of getting the Chimp out of power.

Nowhere does she mention that St. Ralph gets money from far-right assholes or that Camejo is a tepid race-baiter like he was in his continuing jokes of campaigns where he gets jackshit for votes. Also, how is St. Ralph so rich (she must hate rich people too) and why is he making money on stocks from companies that her precious little World would dare allow.

I'm guessing she starts her day off with a heapin' helpin' of fresh-made pot brownies. And she's been doin' it for years...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no name no slogan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Nobody's clean-- not Nader, not Kerry, not Shrub
Kerry gets $$ from the Koch brothers, who own Koch Industries, one of the biggest corporate polluters of all time. The brothers also founded the Cato Institute, and are large contributors to the DLC. Oh, and daddy Koch was the founder of the ultra-right-wing John Birch Society.

Kerry also railed against Wal-Mart in the primary debates, despite the fact that he owns over $1,000,000 in Wal-Mart stock.

He also gets contributions from his brother's law firm, who makes its money helping media conglomerates fend of federal regulators. One of the firm's most prominent clients is Rupert Murdoch, BTW.

Some choice we have. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Where's your evidence of this?
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 10:27 PM by zulchzulu
Give me a link.

I want to see how much money Kerry has gotten from Koch, where you have info on his WalMart stock portfolio and how you know that Cam's law firm deals with Rupert Murdoch.

Please...pretty please... or did you just make this up?

This link says that Koch hasn't given ANY money to Kerry:

"While many donors have given much more in campaign cash to Bush, Koch has not given any money at all to presumptive 2004 Democrat Presidential Candidate John Kerry."

http://www.publicintegrity.org/oil/report.aspx?aid=347

I noticed i looked like some Kucinich people had started some stuff on Kerry's stock portfolio on Daily Kos last February, but the link was www.opensecrets.org without any specific link.

I could make stuff up too and then say "go to opensecrets.org, man" too.

Got link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Killarney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
26. another delusional liar
so, Bush and Kerry are the same 'eh?

Didn't learn from that lie in 2000 did ya, Donna? Remember Nader telling us that Bush and Gore were the same?

If we had president Gore, WE WOULD NOT BE IN IRAQ RIGHT NOW. Not to mention these fucking tax cuts wouldn't have been pushed through and our deficit wouldn't be sky high, etc.

ANYONE THAT SAYS KERRY AND BUSH ARE THE SAME IS EITHER A STUPID FUCK OR A LIAR.

They can go on and on and call Kerry any names they want, but the fact remains that they lied in 2000 and they're lying now and if they help Bush win again, the blood will be on their naive, ideological, moronic hands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. This morning the war drums are beating again, this time it is Iran
Kerry may keep us in Iraq for years, but Bush is going to get us into Iran.

Did anyone see the same cast of WMD characters making the TV rounds claiming that Iran was a bigger threat than Iraq, Jim Woolsey to name one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Killarney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. and Bush won't stop there
if given 4 more years, we'll be in Iran, Syria, and more. And that will not be done without a draft, obviously.

Bush must be stopped. Idiots like Donna can't see through to the big picture.

If we had a moderate Repug in office (not a neocon), yeah, we could vote Green, try our hardest to push the Dems more to the left. But right now WE NEED TO GET BUSH OUT and the only way to do that is to get Kerry in. Then, once Kerry is in we can say... listen you need to move further left or we will not support you in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnKleeb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
31. The irony of course is that the CBC is quite progressive
and most of its members voted against the war and have very liberal records. Many of the CBC if I recall did say no to the patriot act. She's wrong about Kerry appointing anti choice judges when he in fact swore not to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC