Nader Stumps Moore

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

You watched Bill Maher the other night didn't you?

Yes, I did. I noticed that he didn't come out and endorse Kerry. I also noticed he called the Democrats "War Party Lite" in Fahrenheit. I noticed that in one episode of The Awful Truth he said even though the South lost the Civil War, the south effectively has won since because of the conservative bent of both parties. During the 2000 season, he went out of his way to show that Democrats and Republicans weren't that different.

He still ain't saying the Democrats are better, from what I can tell. He's just saying we need Bush out.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Yes, I did. I noticed that he didn't come out and endorse Kerry. I also noticed he called the Democrats "War Party Lite" in Fahrenheit. I noticed that in one episode of The Awful Truth he said even though the South lost the Civil War, the south effectively has won since because of the conservative bent of both parties. During the 2000 season, he went out of his way to show that Democrats and Republicans weren't that different.

He still ain't saying the Democrats are better, from what I can tell. He's just saying we need Bush out.

He declared he was a Dem on RT w/BM. And yes, he agrees we need Buh out. He did defend Kerry to congressman David Dreier. I'll get the transcript if you want.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

He declared he was a Dem on RT w/BM. And yes, he agrees we need Buh out. He did defend Kerry to congressman David Dreier. I'll get the transcript if you want.

I've defended Kerry on occasion too, not because I support him, but because god knows we've got to take pity on the man once in a while.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

I've defended Kerry on occasion too, not because I support him, but because god knows we've got to take pity on the man once in a while.

To that extent, I even pity you at times.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

To that extent, I even pity you at times.

Well, then it's mutual.

And I'll even magnanimously take you back in on Nov. 3, regardless of who wins.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Yes, I did. I noticed that he didn't come out and endorse Kerry. I also noticed he called the Democrats "War Party Lite" in Fahrenheit. I noticed that in one episode of The Awful Truth he said even though the South lost the Civil War, the south effectively has won since because of the conservative bent of both parties.

I just bought The Awful truth on DVD and that show is brillaint. It should've lasted longer than two seasons, IMO. The DVDs are ridiculously priced, too.

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Moore is ABB. He understands the importance of removing George Bush from the White House, first and foremnost in the coming election. He's a Democrat and like a lot of Democrats may not be thrilled with who they nominated but who understands that a third party has absolutely no chance of getting elected and votes for said third party will translate into an absolute waste of paper. I will email him and see if he will clarify this, if he hasn't already on his web site.

Yes, I understood this the first time you wrote it, but that only addresses why people shouldn't vote for Nader. Saying that people shouldn't re-elect senators for a second term if they supported the war doesn't have anything to do with people voting for a third party in the Presidential election.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

Yes, I understood this the first time you wrote it, but that only addresses why people shouldn't vote for Nader. Saying that people shouldn't re-elect senators for a second term if they supported the war doesn't have anything to do with people voting for a third party in the Presidential election.

Don't wait for an answer. It's not something that can be answered logically from their viewpoint. As soon as you try to explain that away, you're stepping into the realm of obfuscation and inconsistency. This is why Moore kept his trap shut on this issue during the show.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Well, then it's mutual.

And I'll even magnanimously take you back in on Nov. 3, regardless of who wins.

Feel I need a little sypmathy...

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

Yes, I understood this the first time you wrote it, but that only addresses why people shouldn't vote for Nader. Saying that people shouldn't re-elect senators for a second term if they supported the war doesn't have anything to do with people voting for a third party in the Presidential election.

Here's your question:

Originally Posted by paleshadow

But if Moore did say not to re-elect senators who supported the war to their current seats, surely he wouldn't want to promote one to President?

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Here's your question:

It wasn't meant to be taken as a question literally, it was to show the irony that he said not to re-elect senators who supported the war, and yet he is supporting a senator who did just that in his campaign for the Presidency. Even if that was taken as a literal question though, your response was an answer to a question that wasn't asked. Now, since we clearly know why he wouldn't want Nader to run, what do you think about the fact that he would reccomend not re-electing senators who supported the war, and yet wishes to elect one President, which was the original point of this thread. This is the kind of contradiction Moore enjoys pointing out in others whose views he dissagrees with, so I think it's nice to catch him at it. No?

[paleshadow]

Just a bump.