RADIOHEAD SAYS "LET RALPH DEBATE"
b.p. nichols
held up a sign reading, "Let Ralph Debate." While it scares me that some of
you don't know who Ralph is, I'll tell you. Thom was speaking of Ralph
Nader, the Green Party candidate for president. Ralph Nader is far and away
the best candidate in this election, however he has been getting far too
little exposure, even being denied entrance into the presidential debate.
Please, anyone in this group old enough to vote, get registered and vote
Nader. Following is a list of reasons you should vote Nader as opposed to
both Gore and Bush, who, at best, are a cancer on the face of humanity.
1. Gore supports the WTO. In case you haven't heard, the WTO is the World
Trade Federation. Their main objective is to promote commerce at all costs.
This results in the lowering or complete dismissal of safety standards in
factories. The lowering or complete dismissal of a minimum wage. The
lowering or complete dismissal of environmental standards, as well as the
lowering or complete dismissal of any other laws or regulations which
inhibit the optimization of free trade. Some would argue that this promotes
world unity, but the truth is that it only promotes global
commercialization. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And the
environment decays to nothing. Ralph Nader opposes this organization.
2. Gore supports a death penalty. The death penalty is a horribly arrogant
and archaic form of justice. No less than two dozen people in the last
twenty-five years have been put to death who were later proved innocent.
Innocent! We are knowingly executing innocent people and a man running for
the highest office in the state supports it! Ralph Nader does not support
the death penalty.
3. Gore is a schill for special-interest groups. While running for office
in Tennessee, Gore sucked up to the tobacco interests there, even claiming
that he knew all about the turmoil of farming tobacco. He cuddled up to the
gun nuts and anyone else who could help get him elected. Then, when that
was no longer fashionable as he was the vice-presidential candidate, he
tossed them aside. Gore has no real stance on any issue. He takes whatever
interests will get him votes.
4. Gore supports the world's financial organizations. There are several
which could be named, but the basic premise is that these banks loan out
money to countries in time of need, but then basically use this as leverage
to turn the country into a money making machine for the bank. To repay the
loans, these banks often force developing countries to cut back on social
programs, safety standards, and minimum wages. As well as any laws
regarding child labor. It is estimated that 16,000 children die every day
to these cut backs in social programs. Ralph Nader sees these banks as the
villains they are.
5. Gore makes no plans for the realization of Universal Health Care.
Please, people. It is passed time that America realize this accomplishment.
It is every citizens right to be treated by a first-class doctor in their
time of need. Millions of Americans are still denied health insurance
because they are either too poor or too "at risk" of needing medical
attention. The health of our citizens should not be a commercial industry
any more than the education of our citizens should. Everyone should have
the right to a proper health plan. It's time to move forward.
You may be asking yourself now; why would a democratic candidate support
(and in the case of UHC, not support) such terrible things? Why is there no
outcry against these monstrocities? Well, the sad fact is, that both major
political parties are nothing more than a public face for corporate
interests, and neither wishes to offend any of their "supporters." Of
course, you may take notice that conglomerates rarely choose to donate money
to only one campaign. Why would they, when they can own both parties? And
they need not worry about the public voting for a third-party candidate,
because everyone in America has gotten themselves convinced that voting
third party is "throwing away their vote." In my humble opinion, voting for
men who are nothing more than second-generation, yuppie politicians, who are
more concerned about the interests of the wealthy than they are about the
welfare of the poor both here and abroad is the only way I can waste my
vote. It is time for America to progress. We are falling too far behind
other countries in social concern. Please, do yourself and your country a
great justice and vote Nader in 2000.
Pass the message along to everyone you know. Every little bit helps.
For more information go to www.votenader.org or
www.speakout.com/Election2000/President/default.asp
Or, if this is too much work, feel free to email me. Thank you for your
attention. And let me (and the other readers of alt.music.radiohead) know
what you think.
--
"Life Is Comedy To Those Who Think, Tragedy To Those Who Feel."
Euh
>held up a sign reading, "Let Ralph Debate." While it scares me that some of
>you don't know who Ralph is, I'll tell you.
Well we are not all from the US...do you know who is the leader of the
green party in Canada ? well me neither and I live there hehe
Link 58155
What the Fuck are you doing. You are only stating the negatives about Gore.
You realise, by doing this, you are taking votes away from gore and adding them
to Nader who is gonna lose anyway. That means Bush will win. Bush is for more
reactionary than Gore. You are eliminating the candidate, who has a chance to
win, and letting some one worse get the job. Either that or you are a
republican really. The Green Party is not gonna win anyway, might as well vote
for gore.
ETG
b.p. nichols
Gore, I am not comfortable voting against my ideals. You're absolutely
right I want people to vote for Nader instead of Gore. Did you read those
negatives? That's not small stuff. The only real fear one might have from
Bush winning over Gore is that he might appoint Justices to the supreme
court who may turn over Roe v. Wade. This concern is mostly unfounded for
one simple reason. The supreme court has never made a retraction to civil
rights, and certainly not one as major as that. Gore does not deserve to
win. Being the lesser of two evils is not good enough in my book. And if
Nader does make Gore lose, then good. It'll force the democratic party to
change their views and become the progressive party they should be. The
arguement you posted will always be true, and if we continue to vote
according to your standards, any progress we make will be slow and tedious,
and the basic problems inherent in our government will never change. So,
you vote your way, I'll vote mine, but I think you are making a huge mistake
and selling out due to fear. Perhaps you shouldn't vote at all.
Comfrtbly Numb
though. by voting for nader you are bringing attension to the third party.
although i do agree that rather then focusing on Gore, you should be bitching
about Bush too
b.p. nichols
everyone already knew why not to vote for him. Basically, he supports the
same attrocities I mentioned of Gore, plus he's against abortion, way too
pro death penalty, and to let the citizens of America gamble away their
social security, causing the system to go bankrupt. Also, he's just an
idiot in general. So, again, vote Nader.
Comfrtbly Numb <comfrt...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001015020546...@ng-fd1.aol.com...
Gonzo
"b.p. nichols" <iner...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:5nbG5.2546$Ds.1...@news4.atl...
> For anyone still wondering. At the end of Saturday Night Live, Thom Yorke
> held up a sign reading, "Let Ralph Debate." While it scares me that some
of
> you don't know who Ralph is, I'll tell you. Thom was speaking of Ralph
> Nader, the Green Party candidate for president.
Try and campaign to change the system!
Proportional representation for your members of parliament or senators or
whatever they're called in the USA would be the best way forward for the
Greens.
GOnz
mike
link...@aol.com (Link 58155) wrote:
its not all about winning, even to get a significant portion of the vote
will make a few people think, most likely the members of the republican
and democratic parties. If they become complacent, eventually the third
party will when. A great day that would be
--
mike
In my dreams i'm dying all the time
http://www.mp3.com/mikeanderson
The Hungerbuhlers
Erik
ICQ# 2435307
"b.p. nichols" <iner...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yTbG5.2855$Ds.1...@news4.atl...
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Servers In California, Texas And Virginia - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
indigolem
>held up a sign reading, "Let Ralph Debate." While it scares me that some of
>you don't know who Ralph is, I'll tell you.
I admit I was clueless for a minute, but he simply could have said
Nader. Why would a Brit be on a first name basis with a U.S. political
candidate?
---
Indigolem ||[ http://octoberzone.port5.com/ ]||
melissa
>Date: 10/15/00 1:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20001015014755...@ng-xb1.aol.com>
voting green party will tell the republican assholes that there needs to be
another choice in the 'people's' vote..
"With our concept making apparatus called "mind" we look at reality through the
ideas-about-reality which our cultures give us. The ideas-about- reality are
mistakenly labeled "reality" and unenlightened people are forever perplexed.."
SWever
Neither Nader or Buchanan are anywhere close to that figure (I think it's 5%).
Nader is a one-trick pony (consumer rights). Not one single minority or
civil-rights oriented group has endorsed him because he ignores their plight
totally. If the only thing you want is a car that's safe, vote for Nader. If
you are interested at all in US domestic or foreign policy, don't. Why is a
British rock star involving himself in US elections? Also, if you are going to
post a lengthy statement on our elections on the board, please don't send it to
me via e-mail. Thank you!
Stefan
Das Monkey
SWever wrote:
americans are funny.
like, really funny.
Yours,
DasMonkey
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[[ http://www.DasMonkey.com ]] (( mon...@dasmonkey.com ))
Almost 50% of comments are intended for constructive purposes.
Andrew Dunn
"b.p. nichols" wrote:
>
> For anyone still wondering. At the end of Saturday Night Live, Thom Yorke
> held up a sign reading, "Let Ralph Debate." While it scares me that some of
> you don't know who Ralph is, I'll tell you.
I'm British, do you know who the Liberal Democrat leader is? I rest my
case.
--
Andrew
~*~*~*
http://www.getinyourcrib.com/user/ajdunn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
phu...@enteract.com
> its not all about winning, even to get a significant portion of the vote
> will make a few people think, most likely the members of the republican
> and democratic parties. If they become complacent, eventually the third
> party will when. A great day that would be
Agreed. Better to vote for a candidate that won't win than to waste your
vote on a couple of clowns. I do wish that the republican candidate wasn't
such an idiot, so I wouldn't feel bad if he won. That's still not enough
to make me vote for Gore, though.
None of Radiohead's members are american citizens, are they?
phu...@enteract.com
> I admit I was clueless for a minute, but he simply could have said
> Nader. Why would a Brit be on a first name basis with a U.S. political
> candidate?
I don't think it would matter. A brit probably couldn't do very much to
get nader allowed in the dabates. :)
phu...@enteract.com
> I'm British, do you know who the Liberal Democrat leader is? I rest my
> case.
Oooh! ooh! I do I do. It's Charles Kennedy, isn't it? I think that's
his first name. Americans even get to watch British parliament in action
on C-SPAN. I personally like the back and forth between John Major and
William Hague. If congress was that openly nasty here in the US, I think
more people would be interested. Instead they just like to ban things. :(
I love Max Forever
and Payne County doesn't have a write in ballot. So, as a protest that my
right is taken away, I'm not voting. I am not going to be forced to vote for
someone I don't like. But please, no Republican in the office!!!! I fell
deeper in love with Thom when he hels up that sign? COULD THOM GET ANY MORE
PERFECT THAN HE ALREADY IS?!? He seems to get better and better.
You can tell a man 'I hate you,' and you'll have the best sex of your life, but
tell him, 'I love you' and you'll probably never see him again!
Matthew Stamegna
Where in Canada do you live?
And you're not voting for the Alliance Party, are you?
__________________________________________________________________________
butterfly has left the building......
www.butterflying.homestead.com
orlando
>
> You must be above a certain % in the polls to appear in a presidential debate.
yeap. the *republicans and democrats* came up with this criteria after
ventura, who was at 8% before the debates, was allowed to debate and
ended up winning the governor seat in minnesota.
> Neither Nader or Buchanan are anywhere close to that figure (I think it's 5%).
15%. unreacheable for someone who gets no coverage. nader is at 5%, and
he's been close to 10% a while ago.
> Nader is a one-trick pony (consumer rights). Not one single minority or
> civil-rights oriented group has endorsed him because he ignores their plight
> totally. If the only thing you want is a car that's safe, vote for Nader. If
ok, granted. he doesn't talk much about racial issues, directly, but
does so indirectly. and winona laduke fills that gap, anyways..
> you are interested at all in US domestic or foreign policy, don't. Why is a
oh, agreed. let's leave the foreign policy stuff to the imf and the wto
and nato, right? why bother our elected leaders with it..
> British rock star involving himself in US elections? Also, if you are going to
why not? the us is the biggest and most powerful country in the world.
whoever wins this election will affect everyone.
orlando
b.p. nichols
it and sent it to everyone in my address book. Some of these were people I
had communicated to only once. I didn't think it was anything to get upset
about.
Secondly, what is all this you are saying about Nader is a one-trick pony?
Do you even keep up with the issues? Nader's main platforms have little or
nothing to do with consumer rights. He already has an organization in the
government working on that. Nader is running predominently on what could be
called, "a civil rights" platform. Anit-death penalty (gee, that doesn't
sound like consumer rights), anti-WTO (this has nothing to do with consumer
rights, it's about social welfare in developing countries as well as
environmental protection), end the was on drugs (again, not about consumer
rights), to end U.S. support of support of China (hmm. that seems like
foreign policy to me), supports same sex marriages (it's sad that this
should even have to be an issue. don't we ever learn to stop oppressing?),
cut defense budget, demobilize, and stop defending already prosperous
countries who can defend themselves (again, sounds like foreign policy to
me), invest in public transportation, lift sanctions on Iraq (again foreign
policy. the mainly U.S. enforced trade sanctions a killing thousands of
Iraqis everyday and doing nothing to weaken Saddam's power), and there are
dozens more. So, for those of you who are so clearly ignorant of the
issues, do us all a favor and don't vote. If you're an American, you should
have a little more interest in this than to say something so stupid as,
"Ralph Nader is a one trick pony." Yes, he became known for consumer rights
(nothing to be scoffed at by the way), but he and the Green Party do have a
cohesive vision for where America should be going which includes economic,
educational, and foreign policies. Thank you and remember vote Nader in
2000.
RMarsPJkix
>Nader. Why would a Brit be on a first name basis with a U.S. political
>candidate?
The "Let Ralph Debate" sign that Thom held up was from a Ralph Nader rally that
was held Friday night at Madison Square Garden in New York City. I am assuming
that Thom was there since the band was in town.
Amanda
Jason McClelland wrote:
>
> Umm, while this all all true, and Gore sucks, you should also mention that Bush
> is the exact same in every aspect. Both of them suck equally, as a matter of
> fact, in their strive to become moderate, both candidates have become 95% the
> same. I'm voting for Browne, but I would much rather prefer Nader over the
> meathead that will be the next Prez.
>
> ~j
Oh, another person voting for Browne! You never hear much about him in
the media, do you? Like that SNL sketch only had Buchanan and Nader. Oh
well...
Btw, yes I don't support Nader but if people believe in him - vote for
him. You hear so many people say things like 'I would vote 3rd Party if
it would make a difference' and no one ever does. Eventually if keep
voting and causing more interest in 3rd-Party, things will happen!
Amanda
orlando
aye.. nothing's gonna change if you keep voting for the same two puppets
every four years.
orlando
SWever
Well, Buchanan's running mate is an African-American woman...does that fill the
gap for him also?
orlando
um, i meant that laduke talks a lot about minority and racial issues.
DJWaxKilla
going to change...the Green Party's smart strategy has been to woo the
undecided factions, and it's working very well...many estimate 10-20 million
votes for Ralph in the election, sure, odds are he won't win, but you gotta
start somewhere, why not look to the future for once instead of settling for
crap in the hear and now?
-Oz
indigolem
>Bush? Is that even legal??? That seems unconstitutional!!! Nowhere is there
>anything written about there having to be only two parties, or that you have to
>garner a certain percentage of voters to appear on a ballot! That is very, very
>upsetting,
Well, there are eight other candidates. But nobody cares about them.
---
Indigolem ||[ http://octoberzone.port5.com/ ]||
Euh
>>Does it ever occur to anyone that Thom Yorke is not even a U.S. citizen and
>>therefore can't vote. No offence but, His viewpoints are "irrelevant".
>
>Occured to me as soon as I saw his sign.
not if you consider that he was supporting a green party. Pollution
doesnt stop at border you know...
Euh
>>>>therefore can't vote. No offence but, His viewpoints are "irrelevant".
>>>
>>>Occured to me as soon as I saw his sign.
>>
>>not if you consider that he was supporting a green party. Pollution
>>doesnt stop at border you know...
>
It's not like he said "vote for the guy". Giving a chance for as many
speakers to be heard can only be good for a democraty.
I'm not from the US so I've never heard of Nader...what's his main
electoral platform ?
DJWaxKilla
and
> therefore can't vote. No offence but, His viewpoints are "irrelevant".
whoever
> else should be Pime Minister?
> I'ts like a Benetton magazine ad....and I still don't buy their clothes.
> JB
As it's been said before, like it or not, America IS the most influential
power in the world, so whoever's running it is a concern, and Thom,
excercising his right as an individual has taken an interest...I mean, even
if you're not American, do you really want a moron like Bush with his finger
on the button?
-Oz
b.p. nichols
supports? The reason I put up this thread was not to say, "Thom Yorke is
voting for Nader! You should too!" I started it to both inform people what
his sign meant, as well as teach them more logical and substantial reasons
people should vote green. Who Thom Yorke or any other celebrity votes for
doesn't influence my opinion on iota. It is cool that he'd like to see
Ralph in the debates though.
NHERENT <nhe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001015201355...@ng-fy1.aol.com...
NHERENT
indigolem
>therefore can't vote. No offence but, His viewpoints are "irrelevant".
Occured to me as soon as I saw his sign.
---
Indigolem ||[ http://octoberzone.port5.com/ ]||
indigolem
>>>therefore can't vote. No offence but, His viewpoints are "irrelevant".
>>
>>Occured to me as soon as I saw his sign.
>
>doesnt stop at border you know...
Green is just a word. It also means rookie.
---
Indigolem ||[ http://octoberzone.port5.com/ ]||
Das Monkey
Jason McClelland wrote:
> Thank you for not saying, "Americans are stupid, like, really stupid." which is how
> I feel every time elections come around. People here are such sheep. I would like
> to think the rest of the world isn't so complacent! Please, tell me that TV doesn't
> pacify the rest of you like it does us? Is there hope?
>
> BTW- why do you think we're funny?
put it this way,
have you ever looked at the people going for prezzzidency?
eggsakly.
Dan
>>>>>Does it ever occur to anyone that Thom Yorke is not even a U.S. citizen and
>>>>>therefore can't vote. No offence but, His viewpoints are "irrelevant".
>>>>
>>>>Occured to me as soon as I saw his sign.
>>>
>>>not if you consider that he was supporting a green party. Pollution
>>>doesnt stop at border you know...
>>
>>Green is just a word. It also means rookie.
>
>It's not like he said "vote for the guy". Giving a chance for as many
>speakers to be heard can only be good for a democraty.
>
>I'm not from the US so I've never heard of Nader...what's his main
>electoral platform ?
It's irrelevant. Unless you're a Republican or Democrat, you aren't
going to be president. We're fooled into believing that we're living
in a Democracy, but that couldn't be further from the truth. That Gore
and Bush got this far is a testament to how little our voices matter
and how far a pocketful of money will get you in politics. If we, the
people, had our way, the political system as it exists in this country
would be torn down and started from scratch.
DJWaxKilla
> >electoral platform ?
Mostly adjusting the American electoral process to truly reflect America's
interests...also cleaning the environment and freeing America and other
countries from the grip of economic programs like NATO and the WTO....to a
lesser degree he also supports seriously "fixing" the horribly botched tax
sinkhole that is the American "drug war," abolishing the death penalty, and
loosening politcal control from big industries and the military industrial
complex...sure, he probably won't win this time around, but this campaign is
meant as a starting ground, to build serious support for future elections
concerning the Green Party, on ALL levels, from mayors to senators to
presidents. Don't underestimate Nader, he's attracting all kinds of
attention...he's been having rallies all over the country in the past few
months, each attracting between 10,000-15,000 people and almost always
selling out...many polls estimate he may get anywhere from 10 million to 20
million votes in the coming election, a serious statement indeed.
-Oz
VOTE NADER IN NOVEMBER!!!
DJWaxKilla
"democratic" elections...every candidate should be REQUIRED to debate the
others, at least once a month, until the election.....still, it's no wonder
that Nader was kept out: he scares the candidates. They know he'd get up
there and make them look like the moronic puppets they truly are. Is it any
wonder that Clinton went out of his way to ask Nader NOT to run in the last
two elections because his advisors were convinced that if Nader ran as a
Democratic candidate he would have taken states like California and
Illinois? Freedom my ass....
-Oz
VOTE NADER IN NOVEMBER!!!
> For the love of all that is holy! Who gives a rat's ass who Thom Yorke
> supports? The reason I put up this thread was not to say, "Thom Yorke is
> voting for Nader! You should too!" I started it to both inform people
what
> his sign meant, as well as teach them more logical and substantial reasons
> people should vote green. Who Thom Yorke or any other celebrity votes for
> doesn't influence my opinion on iota. It is cool that he'd like to see
> Ralph in the debates though.
>
> NHERENT <nhe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20001015201355...@ng-fy1.aol.com...
DJWaxKilla
-Oz
VOTE NADER IN NOVEMBER!!!
> Yeah, it's just a matter of convincing al those people who vote for them
just because
> they think they would be throwing their vote away by voting third party,
>
> ~j
DJWaxKilla
running besides the two monsters. Like I said, ALL of the candidates should
HAVE to meet for a public debate/town forum each month...Nader wants to make
elections a level playing field, where the most money doesn't buy you into
office....
-Oz
> That's what I thought, hence my response. I just wanted to make sure I
was correct. In
> this area, I'll stick with, "Americans are stupid, like, really stupid."!
>
> ~j
Dan
wrote:
>SWever wrote:
>>
>> You must be above a certain % in the polls to appear in a presidential debate.
>
>yeap. the *republicans and democrats* came up with this criteria after
>ventura, who was at 8% before the debates, was allowed to debate and
>ended up winning the governor seat in minnesota.
This is why a third party candidate will never win under the current
government in America. Democrats and Republicans are quick to agree on
something if it's mutually beneficial, and making sure that there will
be no more 'Venturas' is beneficial only to them, not to real
Americans.
>> Neither Nader or Buchanan are anywhere close to that figure (I think it's 5%).
>
>15%. unreacheable for someone who gets no coverage. nader is at 5%, and
>he's been close to 10% a while ago.
And the reason Nader gets no coverage is because the media is
indirectly controlled by the two main political parties. He who pays
for the most advertising space automatically gets the most 'unbiased'
network coverage.
>> Nader is a one-trick pony (consumer rights). Not one single minority or
>> civil-rights oriented group has endorsed him because he ignores their plight
>> totally. If the only thing you want is a car that's safe, vote for Nader. If
>
>ok, granted. he doesn't talk much about racial issues, directly, but
>does so indirectly. and winona laduke fills that gap, anyways..
The problem is that Nader doesn't pander to 'minority' groups.
Minority 'rights' groups thrive on pandering. Notice I said 'groups',
not 'people', because real Americans don't like being talked down to.
>> you are interested at all in US domestic or foreign policy, don't. Why is a
>
>oh, agreed. let's leave the foreign policy stuff to the imf and the wto
>and nato, right? why bother our elected leaders with it..
NATO needs to be completely disassembled. We need a one-world police
force like we need a hole in our head. The next step, of course, is
one-world government. -- totalitarian rule.
>> British rock star involving himself in US elections? Also, if you are going to
>
>why not? the us is the biggest and most powerful country in the world.
>whoever wins this election will affect everyone.
It doesn't really matter who wins any more. Democrats and Republicans
are almost indistinguishable these days.
>orlando
Euh
>Where in Canada do you live?
>And you're not voting for the Alliance Party, are you?
No I'm from Quebec, therefore I'm a f... separatist voting for the
Bloc whose goal is to destroy Canada.
falloutn...@gmail.com
GNNASCARFAN 24
> For anyone still wondering. At the end of Saturday Night Live, Thom Yorke
> held up a sign reading, "Let Ralph Debate." While it scares me that some of
> you don't know who Ralph is, I'll tell you. Thom was speaking of Ralph
> Nader, the Green Party candidate for president. Ralph Nader is far and away
> the best candidate in this election, however he has been getting far too
> little exposure, even being denied entrance into the presidential debate.
> Please, anyone in this group old enough to vote, get registered and vote
> Nader. Following is a list of reasons you should vote Nader as opposed to
> both Gore and Bush, who, at best, are a cancer on the face of humanity.
> 1. Gore supports the WTO. In case you haven't heard, the WTO is the World
> Trade Federation. Their main objective is to promote commerce at all costs.
> This results in the lowering or complete dismissal of safety standards in
> factories. The lowering or complete dismissal of a minimum wage. The
> lowering or complete dismissal of environmental standards, as well as the
> lowering or complete dismissal of any other laws or regulations which
> inhibit the optimization of free trade. Some would argue that this promotes
> world unity, but the truth is that it only promotes global
> commercialization. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And the
> environment decays to nothing. Ralph Nader opposes this organization.
> 2. Gore supports a death penalty. The death penalty is a horribly arrogant
> and archaic form of justice. No less than two dozen people in the last
> twenty-five years have been put to death who were later proved innocent.
> Innocent! We are knowingly executing innocent people and a man running for
> the highest office in the state supports it! Ralph Nader does not support
> the death penalty.
> 3. Gore is a schill for special-interest groups. While running for office
> in Tennessee, Gore sucked up to the tobacco interests there, even claiming
> that he knew all about the turmoil of farming tobacco. He cuddled up to the
> gun nuts and anyone else who could help get him elected. Then, when that
> was no longer fashionable as he was the vice-presidential candidate, he
> tossed them aside. Gore has no real stance on any issue. He takes whatever
> interests will get him votes.
> 4. Gore supports the world's financial organizations. There are several
> which could be named, but the basic premise is that these banks loan out
> money to countries in time of need, but then basically use this as leverage
> to turn the country into a money making machine for the bank. To repay the
> loans, these banks often force developing countries to cut back on social
> programs, safety standards, and minimum wages. As well as any laws
> regarding child labor. It is estimated that 16,000 children die every day
> to these cut backs in social programs. Ralph Nader sees these banks as the
> villains they are.
> 5. Gore makes no plans for the realization of Universal Health Care.
> Please, people. It is passed time that America realize this accomplishment.
> It is every citizens right to be treated by a first-class doctor in their
> time of need. Millions of Americans are still denied health insurance
> because they are either too poor or too "at risk" of needing medical
> attention. The health of our citizens should not be a commercial industry
> any more than the education of our citizens should. Everyone should have
> the right to a proper health plan. It's time to move forward.
> You may be asking yourself now; why would a democratic candidate support
> (and in the case of UHC, not support) such terrible things? Why is there no
> outcry against these monstrocities? Well, the sad fact is, that both major
> political parties are nothing more than a public face for corporate
> interests, and neither wishes to offend any of their "supporters." Of
> course, you may take notice that conglomerates rarely choose to donate money
> to only one campaign. Why would they, when they can own both parties? And
> they need not worry about the public voting for a third-party candidate,
> because everyone in America has gotten themselves convinced that voting
> third party is "throwing away their vote." In my humble opinion, voting for
> men who are nothing more than second-generation, yuppie politicians, who are
> more concerned about the interests of the wealthy than they are about the
> welfare of the poor both here and abroad is the only way I can waste my
> vote. It is time for America to progress. We are falling too far behind
> other countries in social concern. Please, do yourself and your country a
> great justice and vote Nader in 2000.
> Pass the message along to everyone you know. Every little bit helps.
> For more information go to www.votenader.org or
> www.speakout.com/Election2000/President/default.asp
> Or, if this is too much work, feel free to email me. Thank you for your
> attention. And let me (and the other readers of alt.music.radiohead) know
> what you think.
> --
> "Life Is Comedy To Those Who Think, Tragedy To Those Who Feel."
Wow, 22 years later and still no Universal Healthcare for the U.S.A. RIP
GNNASCARFAN 24
> IDIOT!!!!!!1
> What the Fuck are you doing. You are only stating the negatives about Gore.
> You realise, by doing this, you are taking votes away from gore and adding them
> to Nader who is gonna lose anyway. That means Bush will win. Bush is for more
> reactionary than Gore. You are eliminating the candidate, who has a chance to
> win, and letting some one worse get the job. Either that or you are a
> republican really. The Green Party is not gonna win anyway, might as well vote
> for gore.
> ETG
Holy crap this guy called it.