Who are the people going for Nader?

[DisgustiPatriotiated]

Nader Begins Push to Qualify for State Ballots

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=4649448

Nader is registered as an Independent, but is suspected of drawing the vote of the far left, or the Greens. He is being added to the ballots in some states in the Green Party category, as I
understand it.

Who at DU is Nader attracting?

My position personally is that I will vote for Kerry and I have no qualms about it.

I also think Nader is an egotistical asshole, and I think he should have sat this election out.

I also have an inkling that he might be helping in some odd way that we don't know about, but that is just an odd hunch - probably one he doesn't deserve.

[StClone]

1. Why do rats eat poisoned bait

They don't know any better.

[meti57b]

2. they are the people who want four more years of bush

[DisgustiPatriotiated]

3. They say they want a better Democrat

Why do they say such shit?

I am truly baffled.

[Droopy]

4. I think the people going for Nader

are those who believe that the representatives of both major parties have sold out to corporate special interests.

[DisgustiPatriotiated]

5. No, it is more specific to the left.

There are no Republicans going for Nader to my knowledge. It's all a far left thing.

I'm looking for someone to explain the demographic to me. Young? Old? Men? women?

WHAT?

[corporatewhore]

7. i have old school conservatives who i worked with for anti patriot act res

here in austin are campaigning for nader in austin cause the nader 4 prez organized with bill of rights defense comittee
they didnt like iraq
or the patriot act
orNAFTA/WTO

[formernaderite]

10. I know a few Libertarians who will vote Nader again..

...they see this as a way to push a viable third party/candidate. In general, I like Libertarians we differ on communal responsibilities. Then of course you have Green Party members who NEVER were democrats, and vote as a long term plan of recognition. Most Greens understand the party building must be done from the local level. That said, you cannot buy or trade their votes...it's an integrity issue.

In the 2000 election, I managed to get quite a few republicans to vote for Nader...why? I live in a safe democratic state...their votes were a total wash anyway.

[tinanator]

19. loads of Republicans

come back without an agenda, maybe we can discuss it.
Why should it be about demographics? Maybe its about war, and Chavez? Maybe Kerry is chasing voters away? Maybe its HIS fault?

[HEFFA]

6. This post sounds very familiar to me -- oh yeah, I've seen it 100 times!

I specifically remember you posting a thread about a week ago that asked why the whole Nader thing was even an issue. I would suggest that you know very well why it's an issue. As Droopy aptly noted above, there are people that simply don't feel represented by the mainstream Democratic Party anymore. Personally, I am one of those people. I have voted for Nader in the past, but I won't do it in 2004, because I firmly believe that Bush will destroy the fucking planet and all of its inhabitants if given the chance.

My question to you 'Patriated is this: if you don't know why the Nader issue is an issue that keeps coming up, why the hell do you keep bringing it up?

[DisgustiPatriotiated]

8. I asked a different question.

I am asking about the demographics.

[HEFFA]

11. Yeah, I know -- I can read. It's the same scab that you keep picking at.

Maybe if you don't keep bringing it up then those of us on the "far-left" (as you describe it) might actually start to forget why guys like Kerry really aren't our first choice.

[Old and In the Way]

13. You might know....but every day DU gets new posters.

Are you advocating not discussing it? You think we shouldn't discuss the issue because people will be silly enough to vote Nader on these grounds?

Please, that is just plain absurd.

[HEFFA]

41. Not at all what I'm suggesting. I'm just tired of hearing people complain

about Nader while simultaneously being the ones responsible for bringing up the topic.

[DisgustiPatriotiated]

17. I'm not really interested in your therapy process, you can do that

on your own time. If you don't like posts like mine you can avoid them and refuse to answer them.

Jeezus, it is not MY fucking job to hold your fucking hands or coddle you people!

Do I sound like I've had it? YES! I have!

I am asking WHY? I am not asking to be your fucking therapist. If you want to AVOID it, then quit visiting message boards during election season!

I am not going to play tippy toe around your ego in the meantime.

Jeezeus Christ!

[HEFFA]

42. Yeah, it sounds like I'M the one who needs therapy....

Look, bub...take a deep breath and try to listen. My point is simple. I don't understand why you (and others) continue to bitch about Nader when you're really the only ones bringing him up. I don't see anyone here posting positive things about him or things that promote his candidacy. I just see a continual bitch session about him. If you don't like him, fair enough. Why continually hammer at the issue?

[HFishbine]

45. Demographics

will only give you limited insight into what drives Nader voters, but, from 2000:

% OF ALL VOTERS (Nader in parentheses)
--------------------------------------

20% liberal (6%)
50% moderate (2%)
29% conservative (1%)
9% religion - none (8%)
9% Gore too conservative (10%)
34% Bush too conservative (5%)
17% 18 - 29 years old (5%)
21% high school graduate (1%)
24% college graduate (3%)
7% income under 15,000 (4%)
15% income over 100,000 (2%)
39% democrat (2%)
35% republican (1%)
27% independent (6%)
2% would not have voted in a two-way race (31%)

[flaminbats]

12. But Nader needs this publicity..doesn't he?

How else could Ralph receive this kind of press coverage without people in our party screaming and posting about what a terrible threat he is? :evilfrown:

[HFishbine]

43. Ding!

You can cut through all the name calling and venom and read Droopy's post for the straight answer.

[Zorra]

9. I'm a left-wing populist tree-hugging liberal peacenik

Kucinich supporting Democrat that agrees with all the Key Principles of the Green Party and I'm voting for Kerry.

Voting for anyone else but the Democratic nominee is nothing short of insane.

Anyone that votes for Nader is voting for imminent Bu$h totalitarianism, and they know it.

[ordentros]

14. ummmmm...

says u. last time I checked, a democracy is supposed to tolerate a tough fight. nader represents my views, so I'll support him. I think it's insane for people to vote for someone based on fear rather than a positive agenda.

[Zorra]

20. How will you feel if Bu$h wins the election after you voted for Nader?

And all your rights are gone?

There is a similar precedent in history. The German people failed to unite behind a party strong enough to get rid of Hitler and the Nazis. They spread their votes out and this enabled the Nazis to take complete control of their country
And they, and the rest of the world paid a hard price with the blood of millions of people.

We should learn from their mistake, and not let the same thing happen here.

Bu$h kills, and he will kill again.

I hope you understand that.

[Kerry in 04]

23. Why did/will they vote for him?????

It makes no sense. Pick the better of the two. Almost all of them would pick Kerry. But they are just going to throw their vote away. It's a shame.:thumbsdown:

[WitchWay]

57. Please Remember

That in the last election the Democrats never, ever even took care of the "purge" of voters in Florida...those voters were still scrubbed from the list in 2002.

Those are mainly African American Voters -- so the Democrats are complicit in racist disenfranchisement. It's that simple.

So, the Democrats themselves are complicit in the 2000 election, and by your fear-mongering logic -- would thus be complicit in the Bush regime. So would the 22% of registered Dems who voted Bush last time around (thats really where the votes went).

There are so many things Gore could and SHOULD have done to win that election. I don't know if he really wanted to win, if you get what I'm saying.

[mouse7]

29. Anyone who wouldn't unite to defeat Dumbya is insane and selfish

The one thing most consistant in Nader suppoerters is they don't give a shit about the damage that other people have to face because of neo-con policies.

[zulchzulu]

50. Great Spirit bless you

So true... anyone who votes for Nader simply wants to have more Bush insanity bestowed upon this country.

[Old and In the Way]

15. Apparently Ralph and his fanclub feel the country hasn't suffered

enough. Ralph's main thesis in 2000 was there was no difference between Al Gore and George Bush. So I assume Al would have-

(1) Pulled us out of the Kyoto Protocols.
(2) Dismantled the EPA.
(3) Drained the Treasury by close to 1BB on taxcuts to the rich.
(4) Privitize Medicare
(5) Privitize Social Security
(6) Let 9/11 happen
(7) Invade Iraq.

Will Ralph run on the same thesis this time? Stay tuned.

[bluestateguy]

16. I'll tell you who

Bitter, unrealistic, overprivilged, out-to-lunch, extremist, still living in the 60's, trail mix eating, hackey sack playing, dreadlock wearing, backpacking through Europe, America hating weasles who are doing everything they can to put George W. Bush back into the White House!

Any questions? I speak my mind.

[ulysses]

39. all in one package?

That's a pretty impressive cariacature. "Trail mix eating"? Who knew it was a demographic?

I speak my mind.

A mind crying out to be spoken, no doubt.

[arewethereyet]

18. idiological purists

and there are a boatload around here or at least there USED to be.

don't see then posting much anymore...

[DisgustiPatriotiated]

21. that was my suspicion

good riddance!

[Ricdude]

22. I'm an ideological purist!

...but I recognize the long-term damage that may be done by the next president that gets to appoint supreme court judges. And I realize that the lesser of two evils is still a *lesser* evil.

That said, if Kerry's ahead in my state (likely, though no guarantee) by a reasonable margin, I may vote for the Greens as a continued sign of my disgust with the Democratic Party courting the middle of the field instead of the left.

Who's voting for Nader? Re-read Chomsky's take on Kerry vs. Bush. Some people don't see enough of a difference to pick one over the other. I'm not one of them, but I can understand where these people come from. Some of us (myself included) will likely vote for Kerry, and hold our nose while doing so, and come home and take a shower. Face it, some people just won't be happy about Kerry. The beauty of democracy is we all get a vote. Not everybody has the same values as you, so not everyone will vote the same as you. Not everybody has the same priorities as you, so not everyone will vote for the same reasons as you.

As far as complaining about people voting for Nader, what about people supporting Bush? With Kerry as a candidate, you should have an easier time drawing more than enough uncommitted Republicans and moderate independents to Kerry than you could possibly hope to lose to fringe Nader voters. Hint, see Boondocks from last Sunday.

And if you're that worried about Nader stealing votes from Kerry, work towards getting instant runoff voting in your state. Then we can all be happy. Instead of casting our votes *against* the greater of the two evils, we can vote *for* our preferred candidate, thus expressing our platform preference, without jeopardizing the chance of our greater evil gaining a plurality in the process.

IRV. Or move the Democratic Party a few notches to the left. I.e. listen to Dennis. Either do one of these things, or accept that you're not going to get the far-left voters for your cause.

[LWolf]

24. I'm a purist.

1. I'm still here.

2. I've never voted for Nader, and I never planned to. At this point, the only reason I would cast a vote for Nader would be to rub it in certain democrats' blowhard faces, since they are expending so much energy in attacking non-stepford democrats and suggesting that they leave the board and the party. I won't do that; GWB is a little more important issue than any rude, arrogant, narrow-minded bigot. So I guess the attack strategy isn't paying off.

3. I have plenty of posts to my credit.

4. It could be that many aren't dropping in on these little love-fest threads because they've happily exercised the "ignore" function, relegating bombastic attack threads to the time out room. An idea with merit.

PROUD PURIST. PROUD IDEALIST. I'M NOT GOING AWAY. DEAL WITH IT.

[legin]

25. Great post LWolf

:loveya:

[Desertrose]

27. well said as always LWolf....

and I second that!

PROUD PURIST. PROUD IDEALIST. I'M NOT GOING AWAY. DEAL WITH IT.

:loveya: :hug:
DR

[LWolf]

46. An observation on idealism...

I came across this on someone's blog recently. I have no idea who; I don't even remember how I got there. It just struck me as an interesting perspective from a non-idealist.

http://inmylife.motime.com/1077079673

Young idealists are full of energy and enthusiasm. They know they can change the world. Bright, capable, determined, and creative, these people are future-oriented. They ask why not and see things others cannot see. They are people magnets who motivate others and make things happen. They inspire loyal devotees and alienate cynics.

Middle-aged idealists are a pain in the ass. They haven't quite given up on the dream, but they are aware now of the limitations in themselves and the rest of the world. Their dreams are fractured, their heroes cracked; they no longer have the energy they once did, and their enthusiasm is punctured with holes of reality. In short, they're jaded perfectionists, often sarcastic and not much fun to be around on their bad days. They still have the capability to motivate and inspire, but there is more desperation in their pleas, and young people gradually pick up on this and respond with either compassion or dismissal.

Old idealists are the best kind. Seasoned by the world, they know that, although there is much they cannot do, there is much they have done and will continue to do as long as they draw breath. Although their defeats have been spectacular, their successes have indeed made the world a better place. Though they have paid a high price for their idealism, the cost has been worth it to them. People of all ages are drawn to them, and those who listen to them are rewarded.

When idealists finally do stop breathing, those who mourn them find it nearly impossible to encapsulate those shining lives into words, for the sense of loss is too profound. Another light has gone out, but the glow that remains in the hearts of others is a testimony to the fact that one person can truly make a difference. I love idealists!

Who are the idealists that have left a glow in your heart?

During my lifetime, it would be MLK and Gandhi. And, of course, DJK!

[TrueAmerican]

26. Who? Stupid fucking bastards and Assholes!

That's who. I said it and it's true.

[AntiCoup2K4]

35. Bush and the DLC are both voting for Nader?

Now there's a shock!

[redqueen]

28. Me!

I am supporting Kucinich now, but will vote for Nader or another third-party candidate if he's not on the ballot in November.

And thanks for all the namecalling, lovely fellow Democrats! We're getting closer to morphing into FreeRepublic every day! Nice to know it's not only the party that's lusting to be more like Republicans.

:puke:


Just so I don't get BANNED because of the kneejerking crap that's so ubiquitous on DU, let me explain ...

I live in TEXAS. If Texas is close for Kerry, I'll work for and vote for him, but let's be realistic, shall we?


My unasked for advice to you insulting, holier-than-thou, fictitiously concerned Democrats is to stop with the freaking insults and start working towards your own goals. Nobody is trumpeting Nader's virtues here so STOP STIRRING THE F$&#ING POT ALREADY!

Unless, that is, you WANT to drive the wedge in deeper.

That couldn't be it though, could it? You've been here four days and can't seem to stop with the liberal bashing - what gives?!

[nomaco-10]

31. Yep, the "purge" (code name "house cleaning") ....

began in earnest here a few weeks ago. It's been quite successful thus far. Everytime I come in here now, I can count on one hand the number of progressives left here that still post.

Electability is the mantra now, fall in love then fall in line.
Problem is, I don't care much for ham sandwiches, but I'm trying to acquire a taste as repugnant as that is to me. You see some of us wanted a meatball sandwich, some a veggie burger, some would even have been happy with some K-rations, but I suspect we'll end up with peanut butter and cheney.

[corporatewhore]

30. There are oldschool cons i worked w/last summer for an anti patriot act

res here in austin are campaigning for nader in austin cause the nader 4 prez coordinator organized with the bill of rights defense comittee for the resolution.
they didnt like iraq
or the patriot act
orNAFTA/WTO

[WitchWay]

56. You're Right about the Conservatives

there are conservatives who really like Nader. Nader is much more of an independent type than a Green, after all. (I think the reform party in Texas is trying to get Nader on their Line, btw).

I have close family members who are older conservative/independents that love Nader. They like him because they find him responsible, honest, and they like his platform.

Nader would have appeal (if he can be heard) all over the political spectrum -- which would be a great thing. He could really make the poltical debate in this country much more informative, lively and responsible again (instead of this talk radio soundbite crap Americans have gotten so used too.) It would be much more intense than the sort of kid-glove boxing going on between the corporatist Kerry and the corporatist Bush.

Also, alot of people voted for Bush precisely because he said no nation building. Those conservative folks might want to vote for Nader because he's anti-war, unlike Kerry or Bush. There are alot of repubs who would NEVER vote Kerry, but would vote Nader.

[GreenPartyVoter]

32. I like Nader, I'll like whoever the Greens put up

but I wil hold my nose and vote for Kerry just to spite $hrub.

I think most folks who otherwise would not have voted for the Dem feel teh same way this time around.

[SemperEadem]

33. I believe Nader is funded by the GOP to divide the Dem vote

funny how he disappears for 4 years and then resurfaces with the same, tired out rhetoric he spat in the 60's. If he was that into changing things, then why not run for, say, governor or respresentative, where he would stand a far better chance of winning, instead of hanging out and doing nothing but waiting on the next presidential election he won't win.

[redqueen]

36. He only 'disappeared' because the WHORE media had no use for him

:grr:

[WitchWay]

54. You should be concerned

If you are concerned about republican operatives (and this is rhetorical, because I think politicians, in general, can best be describes as corporatist operatives) -- how come Kerry is still a Bonesbrother with a secret allegiance in Skull and Bones to Bush? How come Theresa Heinz was formerly married to a Republican senator in the same organization? How come Kerry was possibly considering McCain as a running mate? Kerry is much more supicious on the face of it. Kerry is the one who is always voting away various powers to Bush (IWR, FastTrack, Patriot Act). Kerry supports Free Trade and an imperialist agenda, and has no Iraq exit plan, for instance.

But, You need to take a look at the Nader Page before making accusations about Nader not doing anything. Nader has been busy his entire life doing things.
http://www.nader.org

Part of the reason that Nader is running is because he is having difficulties effecting change. The democratic party became so unresponsive, that Nader felt compeled to run for office. Nader is running precisely because he and organizations he founded, or organizations similar to his have been increasingly shut out of Capitol Hill. This became especially true with the development of the DLC and the Democrats' increasing reliance on corporate donors.

Nader has his reasons for running for president, and many of these have to do with the history of third parties in this country. Third parties can have significant effects on the agendas of the major parties -- and the republican party was actually formed out of third party movements.

When you have a two party system, you begin to have a situation of stagnation. With this stagnation comes an increasingly ineffective, unresponsive, unaccountable government. There is no competition -- so the parties have no need to serve the people or be held accountable. The more similar they are, they easier both parties can serve corporate interestes, and neglect the voters interests. After all, the voters have no power to change things. When voters have low expectations, they can only expect low returns.

Run inside the party? Nader said you can't win a wealth primary. He was right. Look at what happened to Kucinich. Just like Nader said. It was Kerry with his big bucks that won, and it was a very unfair situation, to say the least.

This two-party stagnation has become increasingly dangerous, though, due to imperialism and corporate control over our government. The Free Trade agreements are actually very dangerous, because they actually risk American sovreignty(letting Geneva tribunals take precedence over American policy)...Both parties are guilty of putting corporations before our country and us American People. Nader is running because he opposes corporate personhood and the undue influence that corporations have in this country and over the government.

Nader would proabably have a really good chance of winning if it weren't for the two party duopoly which controls everything from ballot access to the debates. You can look at
http://www.opendebates.org
for information about the debates and the complaint filed against the bi-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates. These debates are a sham, controlled by the two party system (and therefore, not democratic). The intent is to stifle anything controversial or any voice that is a threat to the two-party system (who seem to cooperate a lot on a lot of matters). The parties determine the format of the debate, and they can make sure that no tough questions are asked. Heck, they aren't even real debates!

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

34. I am, for one

In fall of 2002, I said that I'd never vote for any Democrat who backed Bush's illegal invasion. Kerry voted for it, so he lost my vote (and probably a lot of others). period.

and the Dean-Osama ads didn't exactly win me over, either.

[info being]

44. Good point. When you think about it...supportuning this war is

wrong. Period.

[zulchzulu]

51. Bzzzzt

Saying Kerry voted "for the war" is like painting a scene with a woman on a sofa except you forget the woman and only paint the sofa. And you call the painting "Room".

Kerry voted for the UN to do its job and go into Iraq only as a last resort and with a multinational coalition.

Bush lied about the WMDs, threw out the UN and attacked unilaterally.

Get the picture?

[genius]

37. Idiots and people who are angry

Nader isn't that good. Gore was better. However, unless the party stops distancing the left, Nader may beat out Kerry.

[John_H]

47. They're all idiots whther they're angry or not

[Robb]

38. All I ask right now of Nader supporters

...is that when Nader doesn't become president, you promise to remain active in politics during the Kerry administration.

Political idealism is a fine thing, and if you feel voting for Kerry would compromise principles you hold dear, then for goodness sakes, don't vote for him.

I honestly don't believe a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush; I believe there are more of "us" than "them" across the spectrum, and I believe when the votes are tallied, Bush votes plus Nader votes will still be fewer than Kerry votes.

I only believe a vote for Nader is a vote against Kerry, who is my party's nominee. This is how I also feel about a vote for Bush. So while I may share values with Nader supporters, it's no different than the (far fewer) values I might share with Bush supporters. Those shared values don't preclude me from feeling you are against me, and against my party.

[WitchWay]

52. One thing to Remember

One thing to remember is that Nader is pulling from both repub and Dem parties -- so, if the dems meet basic standards, people will feel okay to vote for Kerry -- but Repubs who would never vote for A Dem still have an "out" instead of a vote for Bush (I have two close repub-leaning family members who are Nader voters/fans).
Also, everyone needs to start really worrying about local seats -- if Nader does pull more heavily dem, or if he gets a chance to really speak out against the repubs -- then, there are all these people who are being drawn into politics (alot of Nader voters are non-voters, or very disillusioned, or independents) -- then, they might tend to vote dem on local and house votes.
The thing is, that there are probably some more shared values that might actually translate into actual votes for Dems (if you exclude the presidency and think local and state)...
The most important thing about Nader is that he will be an anchor for Kerry to be able to pay more attention to more "leftist" issues (in order to win) instead of being pulled more and more towards the corporate right.
But, I guess the important thing is to get alot of people (of all parties) educated about all kinds of matters, registered and out to vote.
I think the biggest thing that needs to happen is for people to get educated about the Media, talk radio, television, propaganda (including following money trails) -- and it's control over our lives and politics. Too many people are letting themselves get spoon fed TV bullshit, and ignorant talk radio soundbites -- and there is not enough reading, analysis, lengthy discussion. This, to me, is the one big obstacle that is seriously distorting our democracy.

[shivaji]

40. Nader voters are purists who will accept no compromise

If you have voted for Iraq War Resolution, no vote for you.
If you voted for Nafta, no vote for you.
If you voted for any corporate tax break, no vote for you.

and on and on and on.....

Above basically describes the Nader voter.

[WitchWay]

48. Purists?

That just goes to show how similar Kerry really is to Bush, making Nader's argument that there needs to be more voices pretty damn valid, then. Kerry seems to vote powers to Bush whenever he can...Oh, you forgot Fast Track and the Patriot Act, not to mention Kerry's helping Bush's attempt for another Venezuelan coup.

This war is totally inexcusable. It is NOT okay that Kerry voted for it. It is NOT okay that the democratic party isn't deeply engaged with trying to put an end to it. The War is Wrong and unjustified. It is not accpetable for the Democratic candidate to support it.

If you believe that these matters are of little consequence, and if that is a fair representation of the party -- that totally justifies and invites the need to have more representation avaible in the upcoming election.

And you are right. There is nothing pure about this war. It's a filthy war based in corruption that's all about oil, greed, the military Industrial Complex, and wealth. If Kerry will continue the war, Kerry doesnt' deserve the votes of those who vehemently oppose it.

If Democrats really believe that Purity and idealism are so bad -- than Democrats can expect a corrupt, disintegrating, unethical party that will screw everyone over in a heartbeat. Low expectations aren't the best way to make changes for the better.

[zulchzulu]

49. Stupid, childish bores who don't have a clue about what is going on

Anyone who is for Nader is equal to someone who supports Chimpy.

Same damn piece of shit. Different dogshit pile. But the same damn thing.

As far as I'm concerned, a Nader supporter this year is merely to be seen as my opponent and I will do all I can to make sure they are defeated and humiliated.

I will protest Nader if he dares to come anywhere near where I live.

[WitchWay]

53. It doesn't make sense

It doesn't make sense to use your ostracism tactics. You will only alienate people, and make the democratic party look fascist and mean, not to mention anti-free speech.
Besides, Nader voters might tend to vote dem on other positions, but hatred and bullyism isn't going to be convincing.
Remember, there are and will be many disillusioned republicans who would vote for Nader. On the other side, there are those who would NEVER vote Kerry (but would be willing to vote Nader) who might also be so pissed off at the republican party that they would vote dem other places too (even though they would not vote for Kerry).
Honey is sweeter, as they say.

Anyways, If Kerry does what's right -- he shouldn't have to be worrying about Nader. That should be your bigger concern.

[AgadorSparticus]

55. actually, with any more luck, maybe bush will shoot himself out

of contention. so far, the only thing he's done well is stick his silver foot in his mouth. and I am far from complaining.

can't wait to hear the buzz on his revolting jokes on WMD. nothing kerry can say can beat bush down more than what bush is doing to himself right now. and with condi not testifying under oath and publicly?...they are in deep shit.

[WitchWay]

58. Bush is pretty close

I agree with you! Bush is doing a great job of self destruction. I think people are getting a lot smarter/wiser about what is occuring in this country.

I think its very possible Bush might self destruct, or some more stuff might come out about him. The implosion is bound to happen.

I think the WMD joke was absolutly disgusting! And I can't believe he did it after Cheney just got in trouble for his WMD joke -- its like they WANT to insult people and get chewed out.

Well, I still think talk radio needs to be dismantled somehow. But, maybe that is about to implode too...hehehe.