Kerry, a.k.a. Bush, Takes Funding from Halliburton
 

Lately, we've seen a lot of vilification here of a great American, Ralph Nader, for the supposed hypocrisy in "accepting" help from Republicans for his campaign. For his merely playing the stock market, god forbid!

This is all a dirty campaign by the Democratic Party to demonize a great man who has done a lot for the American public, including pushing for the passage of the Freedom of Information Act, which benefits you and me everyday, every time we read a newspaper or watch a TV news show.

What the Democrats aren't advertising is that John Kerry's campaign has taken $130,000 from Halliburton. Gasp! Yes, that is about three times as much as Nader has taken contributions from Republicans.

Are the Democrats really in an ethical and moral position to lambast Nader the way they do? Or are they trying to demonize the man because they know that, like four years ago, they are trying to ram down their voters' throats an unpalatable candidate who really doesn't represent them?

So, let's see, so far Kerry has

--Admitted that knowing what he knows today he'd still vote to let Bush wage war on Iraq. Even William F. Buckley has said that knowing what he knows today he would have opposed the war.
--Promised to not only sustain but expand the faith-based initiatives the Democrats criticized Bush so much for.
--Promised that while he won't drill for oil in Alaska he will "drill everywhere else." Nice!
--Promised more tax breaks, i.e., CORPORATE WELFARE, for corporations.
--Promised to stick with Bush's Middle East roadmap.
--Banned anti-war protests from his political rallies.

Is it any wonder this Bush Lite would take funding from Halliburton, the same company Dick Cheney led and for which we went into this ill-advised, unjust war into Iraq?

Kerry = Bush.

Are you really surprised ANY politican is in the pocket of big oil :laugh:

I am not surprised Kerry is in the pocket of big oil. Kerry and Bush to me are virtually indistinguishable.

So you've said :cool: :laugh:

It seems like every other day I post yet another example of Kerry acting like Bush.

I then just sit back and wait for the barrage of hostile responses and attacks on the great American Ralph Nader.

True - AND I am not so sure that people dispute Nader was a great American in the past. I think people, like me, find Nader hypocritical now because he has allowed those he protests (the R's) to help him in his campaign and he has invested in and made money off of the very companies he protests. That is my only beef with Nader. That and he looks a half of a bubble off of center in the last few interviews I have seen :laugh:

You have no footing, man. That's all I keep trying to point out to you and the rest of the democrats who are voting for Kerry.

Can you really, honest-to-goodness recite to me what Kerry stands for? Can you even make sense of his insistence that he would have gone to Iraq even without the WMD?

I can tell you exactly where Ralph stands on issues and how he reflects my own positions.

Spin

I am not asserting Kerry's positions on anything. I am pointing out that Nader has been hypocritical and responding to you assertion that he is a great man :shrug:

But, to answer the spin, I pretty much agree with Kerry on the war in Iraq (I know you do not - so let's not go there :laugh: ) - and I think Kerry is softer on gay marriage, abortion, and civil rights in general than W or any of the far far right to which he is beholden could ever be. Plus, I want W out of office and Kerry is the only other horse in the race. So, Kerry gets my vote. As I have said before I know that makes me hypocritical - but I do not really care because it works in my mind!!!!! :laugh:

Ollie North lived as a convict for four years.

Here you come again
and here I goooooooo

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

:p :p :p :p

SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

LOL

We are all hypocrites to some degree so I am just honest about it. So be it.

Again, I want W out - that is my goal - that I do not mind Kerry and actually like alot of his stuff is a boon!!!!!!

Oh god, he stole a Long Range Acoustic Device. :shocked:

No - I got that from Sharon (Sulamith) years ago - the SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE that is - although . . . . . . .

( :wavey: to Sharon if you are lurking - we miss you darlin'!!!)

Kerry took money from Halliburton, therefore...

Kerry = Cheney = Bush = We're all fooked!

I see, I see.

I say they get rid of the Long Range Acoustic Devices and just strap your southern ass on top of a van.

If they strap me in the "right" place(s) - I can hit about up to C above the measure (treble clef) in full opera -


NYC HERE I COME - perhaps in a giant pump on top of a bus in lame with wings and straps while belting -


SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE (vibrato starts about a third of the way into it for the hypnotic effect!!!!) :cool:

Vibratto ala "Gypsy" in the Mirage vid would sure get 'em hypnotized. :nod:

I think that's awfully black and white. Kerry accepting campaign donations from Halliburton doesn't put him in the same league as Bush lying to congress and Cheney covering up his energy task force.

Wake up to reality!

Amen!!!!!!!

Lord love ya darlin' :cool:

Perhaps not, but it sure reinforces his image as a hypocrite. Not that he needed it...

and Nader is so pure :rolleyes:

Again, they are all hypocrites IMO

Gotta stop looking in the mirror, buddy. [And lest anyone be shocked by that, this is by Jason's own admission. I don't go around calling people hypocrites, I mean regular people, not politicians.]

I love the deafening silence on this one. I guess some things are just indefensible.

I was also thinking when I saw this thread yesterday that it would give people a lot to discuss, but maybe you're right.

John Kerry can't seem to a pull a decent lead in the polls, anyway, and I wonder if some of the people who have been defending him here so strongly are beginning to have doubts about him.

I don't think it's all that hypocritical. My main beef with Halliburton is the fact that Cheney, the former CEO of Halliburton, is the VP of the US. Cheney certainly hasn't proven to the public that he accepts this obvious conflict of interest, nor has he been transparent with regard to possibly shady contracts and influence peddling.

Now compare that to Kerry. Hmmm. Let's see. Halliburton donated money to his campaign. And ?????? Nothing.

If the argument is- "Halliburton is a scuzzbag corporation, so how dare Kerry take money from them"- then you've just wiped out all major political candidates. They ALL accept donations from companies that I consider scummy. I don't automatically convert a donation to "instant access" or any influence of any kind. There has to be more to the equation.

It just isn't all black and white. Kerry has never "been in bed" with Halliburton, therefore, their donation to his campaign is just part of the larger overall money picture.

Personally, I think the U.S. way of raising campaign funds is complete bull****. Hopefully, it will change- but until then I will support the candidate that is going to do the least overall damage to this country and its citizen's personal liberties. At this point, that candidate is John Kerry.

Smug arrogance never looks good on anyone. ;)

Now Now - quote me accurately - I said we are ALL hypocrites to some degree - I am just willing to acknowledge that in myself :)

If you find Nader's making money off of investments in companies that he publicly is against and if you are okay with Nader openly taking assistance from the Republican party and if you are okay with Nader not disclosing his financial records - great.

I think it is the highest hypocrisy amongst all of us hypocrits and am baffled that you cannot see that - but you would rather argue against it - perhaps just for the sake of arguing :shrug: :cool:

And if you're OK with the dirty tricks by the Democrats to keep him off the ballots and turn around to criticize him for taking "help" from the Republicans, that would make it double hypocrisy and shameless, dirty-down-low cynicism. Right?

My point is they are all hypocritical - I never said any different - you did - ir at least implied it when you said Nader was decent, a great American, blah, blah, blah. That is when I and others pointed out that Nader, like all of them, is a hypocrit. This whole Kerry is bad spin cannot egate Nader's hypocrisy - yet you continue to assert it as if it could :shrug: Nader, like Kerry, is a hypocrit. To put it in your words, Nader = Kerry :laugh: :wavey:

Rank hypocrisy from R's, D's, and that great American hero Nader whose self-appointed self -importance never ceases to astound me :laugh: :rolleyes:

Groups Aid Third Party Candidates

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos



WASHINGTON — Rather than shunning the third party candidates floating around in this year's elections, Republicans and Democrats are making the most of them, helping these would-be politicos act as "spoilers" to siphon votes from their major party opponents.

For instance, at least two organized efforts — in one case, a state Republican Party — are taking place to help independent candidate and consumer activist Ralph Nader (search), hoping he will take away votes from Democratic Sen. John Kerry in key battleground states.

"We took the wind out of their sails and we're not ashamed of it — we think it's healthy for the process," said Greg McNeilly, executive director of the Michigan Republican Party, which proudly helped gather 43,000 signatures on state petitions to get Nader on the ballot there. The state requires 30,000 signatures to qualify.

State officials are currently validating the signatures, which are being contested by state Democrats.

Meanwhile, in Oregon, controversy swirls over the ballot access assistance given Nader by the state chapter of Citizens for a Sound Economy, a fiscally conservative non-profit, whose national chairman is former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey. A smaller group, the Oregon Family Council, has also steered members toward signing petitions for Nader.

"Obviously, we oppose 99 percent of what Ralph Nader stands for," said Chris Kinnan, spokesman for the national Citizens for a Sound Economy (search), which also helped the ballot effort in Michigan and Wisconsin. "But we think he is an independent who does have significant support and there is definitely a lot of folks working to keep him off the ballot and that's unfortunate."

Kinnan insists that the group, as a nonpartisan think tank, is not working directly with President Bush's campaign or Nader's team.

In fact, when contacted last week, Greg Kafoury, a Portland attorney who is running Nader's campaign in Oregon, said the issue was part of a broader smear campaign by Oregon Democrats, who have successfully kept the focus off of the issues.

"We've never even had any contact with these people, never spoken to them or had anything to do with them," he told FOXNews.com.

"What's going on is that the Democrats have launched this massive smear campaign, attacking Nader, claiming he has all this Republican support," Kafoury said. "All we want to do is talk about the issues."

Asked why the group, which was founded by prominent Republicans, would help Nader despite their myriad differences on policy, Kinnan said, "We think he helps shape the debate for us. He forces Kerry to share where he stands on the issues."

Democrats don't hide their anger over what they call a cynical attempt by Republican interests to get Nader involved in the Michigan race.

"GOP staffers themselves were circulating the (Nader) petitions," said Jason Moon, spokesman for the Michigan Democratic Party, which has formerly charged that the state GOP assistance to Nader amounts to illegal in-kind contributions.

"It shows that a vote for Nader is clearly a vote to elect George Bush, and it shows the Republicans in the state don't have much confidence in their candidate," said Moon. "We have no problem with Nader taking the vote as long as he legally does so."

Recent statewide polls of likely voters in Michigan and Oregon show Kerry leading Bush by slim margins, and with Nader picking up 3 percent and 4 percent respectively. A Republican poll of likely Wisconsin voters released last week found Kerry and Bush deadlocked at 46 percent each, with Nader getting 2 percentage points.

Concerned by Nader's pull, a group called The Nader Factor (search), which is led by former staffers on Gov. Howard Dean and Gen. Wesley Clark's failed presidential campaigns, recently launched advertisements in New Mexico and Wisconsin — two key battleground states where Democrats allege Bush supporters have been helping Nader's efforts — questioning their collusion.

"Why is Nader taking their help?" the ad asks. "Who knows? Maybe Nader and the right wing know something we don't."

Without the lightning rod of Nader, the Green Party (search), which backed Nader in 2000, says it has not heard of any meddling by major party supporters in their campaign. Green Party Presidential candidate David Cobb, along with running mate Pat LeMarche, are on the ballot in 30 states and seeking access in others.

A spokeswoman with the national office said the Greens don't consider themselves spoilers in any state, and are thus "under the radar" and concentrating on building party identification at the state and local levels.

But Nader isn't the only lightning rod in the races, and the spoiler effect isn't limited to the presidential race. Conservative Constitution Party (search) candidate Jim Clymer, who is running against moderate Republican Sen. Arlen Specter (search) in Pennsylvania, said he got help from Democratic volunteers bearing 1,600 signatures for his ballot campaign. They seemingly wanted to help ease the odds for Democratic candidate Rep. Joe Hoeffel (search).

Clymer said the assistance wasn't necessary.

"First, we would have made it on the ballot anyway," he said, noting that he has filed approximately 35,600 signatures, satisfying the requirement of 25,698. "Secondly, there were a lot of Republicans who collected signatures for me as well, and independents. They had different reasons, different motivations, obviously."

He called the Democratic motivations part "of the game they play," just like the Republicans helping out Nader. "I don't think it's ethical," he added. "I believe in putting my principles before any party organization."

Mark White, spokesman for the Christian-grounded Oregon Family Council (search), which claims only a few dozen of its members actually showed up at one of Nader's conventions to lend signatures to the campaign, said he doesn't see it that way.

"I don't think there was anything wrong with it," he said, acknowledging their ultimate goal is to re-elect Bush. "I have a responsibility to the people who support us and to forward our agenda."

The deadline to get the 15,000 signatures to qualify for the ballot in Oregon is Tuesday. Eighteen other states besides Michigan are currently reviewing petition signatures. Nader has been placed on the ballot in four states through his own machinations and is on the ballot in seven states through Reform and Independent Party endorsements.

In hindsight, White said helping Nader wasn't worth the mostly negative publicity. "If I had to do it all over again I probably wouldn't because it makes it look like there is more of a conspiracy than there is," he said. "Nader can get on the ballot himself."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129801,00.html

P.S. Articles like this are why I often read Fox News. I did not see anything like this on the other networks and I think this article is fair and balanced in that it presents all sides :shrug: Having said that, Fox still ranks at the bottom IMO - right there along with the NYTimes, which at at least has the decency not to claim its fair and balanced :laugh:

I have always admired Ralph Nader, I remember when he was a crusading consumer advocate. Because of him, product safety and other consumer protections became the norm. Having said that, I am surprised at him for allowing himself to be used by EITHER party. He is a very smart man, and the fact that he accepts help from the Republican party (vote gathering to get on the ballot) even though he must surely know his only purpose on the ballot is to siphon votes away from the Democratic party (I cant see Republicans voting for him) gives me reason to believe that his principles have been eroding. He used to stand for integrity. Now, Im not so sure.

As for Kerry taking donations from Halliburton, ask yourself this: WHY would Halliburton DONATE to Kerry? Is it because they fear that their poster boy, Bush, might actually LOSE? and they want the new guy to be beholden to them? Hmmmmmm Also: Halliburton STOLE a HUGE chunk of money from Californians during our energy crisis and if even a PORTION of the money Kerry is getting is from that slimy transaction, then I am sure, since California is a Kerry supporting state, that Kerry is welcome to it.