It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When I talked to John Kerry, I talked basically about the dirty tricks that the democratic parties at the state level are using to try to keep us off the ballot on technicalities, drain our resources. In Arizona, the democrats hired three corporate law firms. They filed suit against us. They had filed suit on such things like one of our signature gatherers-- it takes 14,500 signatures to get on the Arizona ballot. One of the signature gatherers collected 550 signatures. He happened to be an ex-felon who paid his debt to society. He had been on juries. He was a registered voter. They found that he did not pay allegedly a $400 fine to the state, and they wanted to knock off 550 signatures. That would have cost us long days in litigation, and we had to drop our effort. We have limited funds under Federal Election Commission regulation. The democrats have unlimited funds outside of any regulation. That's what they're doing in Oregon and elsewhere. I told John Kerry to-- words to the wise. He may be presiding over a situation, whether he knows it or not, that can be a mini Watergate.
This group should be called Citizens for Irresponsibility. They filed these complaints based on newspaper clippings. There's no coordination at all with the republicans. We had no evidence in our convention in a high school auditorium in Portland, Oregon the other day, that they were in any way supporting us. We did have evidence that the democrats had infiltrated the auditorium to swell our number above the required 1,000 supporters, and as a result gave us the impression, and the impression also was conveyed to Oregon state election authorities who were there with their counters, that we could close the doors and start the balloting. Then when the doors were closed and some latecomers were left out, the 100 or so democrats refused to sign the nomination forms. So, they were like trojan horses. The democrats did obstruct. The republicans put out press releases but didn't engage in any results. But I think that the Committee on so-called Responsibility, that is going to be coming under strong scrutiny, because they're engaging in reckless harassment.
Failed presidential screamer Howard Dean demanded that Nader cancel the Oregon nominating convention and immediately "get out of the race." In a hastily organized conference call press event, Dean denounced Nader as a black-hearted tool of the right wing.
When asked if Republicans are working behind the scenes to get him on the ballot, Nader said he doesn't know much about that but "we've seen lots of examples of Democrats trying to obstruct us … this is a fight for all third parties and independent candidates."
And with a reported 42 percent of Americans wanting troops to return from Iraq; over half of whom think it was mistake to send them there, Nader said, "there's no candidacy except the Nader-Camejo ticket speaking for them," adding that he provides the only anti-war platform for voters this year.
The principal function of the Kerry campaign, as far as the US ruling elite is concerned, is to exclude any challenge to the legitimacy of the war in Iraq from the official debate in the 2004 elections. Opinion polls show the majority of the American people oppose the war in Iraq, and 40 percent favor an immediate withdrawal of all American troops. Those tens of millions of people are entirely unrepresented in the contest between Bush-Cheney and Kerry-Edwards, four multi-millionaire politicians who are all pledged to maintain the US occupation and suppress Iraqi resistance, no matter what the cost in money and lives.
Last weekend, Democratic National Committee chair Terry McAuliffe used his time on CBS’s Face the Nation to highlight rumors and gossip that Nader is taking money from the Republicans. He neglected to mention that the Democrats had organized a concerted effort to keep Nader off the ballot in every state where he has tried to qualify.
As Florida's Republican Party Chair Carole Jean Jordan told a reporter, "Democrats are quick to use the issue of voter disenfranchisement to their benefit, and yet have no problem unleashing their legal sharks on Ralph Nader." You know the Democrats have sunk to new depths when a Republican from Florida can claim to be a defender of democratic rights.
Expose Attemp To Shut LaRouche Youth Out Of The Democratic Convention
July 22—Representatives of the LaRouche Youth Movement will be joined by leading Democrats from around the country, at a press conference on Sunday, July 25, at 4:30 PM, to expose attempts to lock members of the LaRouche Youth Movement out of Boston during the Democratic National Convention. The press conference will be held in the George Washington room at the John Hancock Conference Center in downtown Boston.
Signs of the attempted lockout against the LaRouche Youth surfaced on July 12, when the LaRouche Campaign had rooms at the Marriott Copley Hotel cancelled, for which it had already paid and contracted. The rooms were intended to be used as a central coordinating center for the LaRouche Youth Movement during the Democratic Convention.
The campaign was told by hotel personnel that the rental had been cancelled upon the decision of the Democratic National Committee, whose representative had conveyed the idea that the LaRouche campaign and youth were some kind of security threat. When a campaign representative called another hotel, after hearing this news, she was told by a hotel employee that the DNC had also denied their ability to rent to the LaRouche Campaign, with an "explanation" also citing "security" concerns
quote: When asked if Republicans are working behind the scenes to get him on the ballot, Nader said he doesn't know much about that
Originally posted by donguillermo
Please explain why anything else the Democrats have done to impede Nader is undemocratic? Everything they are doing is perfectly legal. How is it undemocratic to work within the law to achieve political objectives?
Originally posted by JacKatMtn
It seems the Democrats are becoming great friends with litigators these days.
Being Democratic is to allow everyone to have their voice heard, Claiming that what the DNC is doing is "legal" doesn't excuse the fact that their efforts are to prevent this from happening.
Just because they call themselves the Democratic party, it doesn't mean they represent Democracy.
[edit on 25-7-2004 by JacKatMtn]
Originally posted by Jazzerman
This is exactly why I will continue to vote for Nader!
Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Good for you, you should have that opportunity, Unlike DG I am not a biased in politics, as shown by the numerous sources I quoted in my original post. I do not claim either the Democrats or Republicans as my choice of party, They both have taken for granted the very people who have put them in power and will do anything to keep this power.
Notice that when Donguillermo responded to my post, he could only bash the Republican party and offer no legitimate response. This happens both ways as you have seen on the board, and solves nothing.
I will not participate in the bashing, I merely posted information which is important for those like myself, who are undecided. The bashing only steers me further and further away from each party.