The Corporatist Democratic Leadership Council

[The Sushi Bandit]

http://www.ralphnader.com/interest/080103.html

an article by Ralph Nader

[BayCityProgressive]

1. EXACTLY

I think a lot of people here can't deal with the truth and it's a lot easier to blame Nader for anything and everything instead of holding our own party responsible.

[jiacinto]

2. Nader's a lying hypocrite

I think that a lot of his blind followers can't deal with the truth.

[ulysses]

6. You've been reading automated Nader response #47. *click* *whirr*

C'mon, Carlos - I know you have a functioning mind in there. You're not doing yourself or Democratic centrists any great favors by following the "repeat it often enough and it becomes truth" strategy. Why not address the article, instead of the fact of who wrote it?

[jiacinto]

10. See reply #5

That says it all about Nader.

[ulysses]

14. I've seen it most of the 500 times you've posted it.

It relates back to one single point Nader made about Gore in 2000. Care to live in the present?

[jiacinto]

17. It relates to Nader's hypocrisy and dishonesty

But then again, like most of his followers, you will go to extreme lenghts to rationalize and glorify Nader.

[ulysses]

20. Lo. I am wounded.

I've made a new term for people like you: the "regressives".

Sticks and stones then, I guess. Have you read the article?

[jiacinto]

23. I find it funny that Nader talks about the 2000 election race

when he ran so that Gore could lose.

Source: http://web.outsideonline.com/magazine/200008/200008camp_nader1.html

"When asked if someone put a gun to his head and told him to vote for either Gore or Bush, which he would choose, Nader answered without hesitation: "Bush." Not that he actually thinks the man he calls "Bush Inc." deserves to be elected: "He'll do whatever industry wants done." The rumpled crusader clearly prefers to sink his righteous teeth into Al Gore, however: "He's totally betrayed his 1992 book," Nader says. "It's all rhetoric." Gore "groveled openly" to automakers, charges Nader, who concludes with the sotto voce realpolitik of a ward heeler: "If you want the parties to diverge from one another, have Bush win." "

[ulysses]

24. Wow, something new in this debate!

:eyes:

Who am I to deny you your obsessions, Carlos? Knock yourself out.

[w4rma]

7. This time Nader's pretty much correct

He's not charging that the destruction of the Democratic Party or how the Democratic Party is totally corrupt. He's singling out the specific part of the Democratic Party he doesn't like.

This is progress :) And Nader's change of attitude will help in the short and long run.

[ulysses]

9. hey, Rick

Wondered if you'd picked up on that avatar. :)

[w4rma]

16. It looked good on you and so I had to get one for myself

:hi:

[ulysses]

22. heh!

Just didn't want you to think I'd forgotten your advocacy. :)

[w4rma]

29. Its a simple way to advertise for the Progressive Majority

:)

[Bombtrack]

4. Nader is a self-absorbed a-hole

In his view, he deserves no blame for the first 4 years of Bush, and his advice is to nominate Kucinich. So 8 years of Bush wouldn't really fase him at all.

[scarletwoman]

3. This article is absolutely correct!

Concise, well-said, I'm glad you posted it.

Just a friendly warning, though -- nearly any mention of Nader around DU can bring flocks of reflexive Nader-haters swooping down upon your thread. Just want you to be prepared...

All that aside, his analysis of the DLC is precisely right on, imho. I don't care WHO the source is, valuable information is valuable information.

sw
:hi:

[jiacinto]

5. Stocks Nader Invests in Via Fidelity Magellan

"ns.
But Blum thinks Nader’s portfolio — worth about $4.5 million — isn’t diversified enough. The candidate has about 57 percent in cash or near-cash, less than 5 percent in bonds, and only about 38 percent in equities. Of that 38 percent, 25 percent is concentrated in one stock: Cisco. “If you take away the cash, he’s sitting with a high percent in what we’d call aggressive growth,” says Blum. “I’d say that the portfolio’s really overweighted in one stock and in tech in particular.” Nader has an 87 percent concentration in technology, 2 1/2 times the benchmark 33 percent of the S&P."

snip

Of Nader’s equity holdings, about 80 percent is in large-cap companies, 11 percent in medium-cap, and 9 percent in small-cap. Eighty-three percent of his holdings are in growth stocks, with a mere 14 percent in value and 3 percent in blend.
Nader also has fairly modest stakes in mutual funds Fidelity Magellan and Fidelity OTC. "

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/TheStreet/nader_makeover001103.html


Now here are Fidelity Magellan's Top 25 Holdings


Source: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/TheStreet/nader_makeover001103.html


Now here are Fidelity Magellan's Top 25 Holdings. They include such great corporate citizens as:

Citigroup*
General Elec*
Viacom B*
Microsoft*
American Intl Group*
Pfizer*
ExxonMobil*
Wal-Mart Stores
Merck*
Fannie Mae*
Bank of America*
Johnson & Johnson*
ChevronTexaco*
Coca-Cola*
Freddie Mac*
UnitedHealth Group*
Wells Fargo*
Cardinal Health*
Procter & Gamble*
Verizon Communications* (which is having big labor problems)
Home Depot*
Lowe's*
Clear Channel Communications*
Morgan Stanley/Dean Witter*
Altria Group* (Formerly Philip Morris)

Source: http://quicktake.morningstar.com/Fund/Portfolio.asp?Country=USA&Symbol=FMAGX&qttab=portfolio#anchor4

[BayCityProgressive]

8. Nader says the same thing as people here do

yet he is attacked. I think the party needs pressure from the inside and out if it has ANY chance at all to redeem itself. I think it may already be too late for the party though.

[jiacinto]

13. Nader attacked Gore for owning stocks

And yet he owns mutual funds. That makes him a hypocrite.

[charlie]

11. Going to bat

for the group that's hell-bent on delegitimatizing your favored candidate and calling you a far-left McGovernite is kinda weird, Carlos. Maybe you oughta just let this thread pass.

[w4rma]

12. This is a major change, jiacinto. Read the article.

Nader isn't attacking the Demcratic Party anymore.

[jiacinto]

15. The point is

Nader isn't pure when he complains about corporate power, especially when he invests in many of America's best corporate citizens.

[w4rma]

18. He's got his faults, but this time it looks like he's siding WITH Dems n/t

[jiacinto]

19. I'll believe it when I see it

I fully expect Nader to run.

[w4rma]

28. I don't know if he will or not, but this is the first step that he would

take, while remaining true to his positions, toward not running as a 3rd party candidate.

[scarletwoman]

34. You'll believe it when you see it? You won't even read the damn article!

You WON'T see anything, because your precious opinions are more important to you than having an open mind.

The Democratic Party is being deliberately destroyed from within by this Trojan Horse faction of corporatists -- represemting the "owners" of America who are busily and relentlessly assembling a corporate-feudal state.

There is hugely urgent need for people to wake up to what is really happening around them, and the more people sounding the alarm, the better. I don't care if it's Ralph Nader or James P. Hoffa (see: here
posted a couple days ago), if there are people who will listen to them and gain a better understanding of what the political stakes are right now, isn't that all to the good?

I don't see how holding onto rancor over past events does ANYTHING to help with our PRESENT. It's self-indugent and it does nothing to strengthen OUR side of the struggle for the future of our country and our planet.

sw

[jiacinto]

37. Because St. Ralph is going to run again

And yeah I did read the article. Then I read Nader talk about the 2000 election and I thought, "What a complete asshole?" Yeah, that's what I think of Nader.

And you know what, Scarletwoman, Nader is a hypocriate. If he is so "anti-corporate" why does he own stock in some of America's best corporate citizens like Wal-Mart and Clear Channel Communications?

[Bombtrack]

21. except that the article is completeely misleading

from the article you would think that every DLC democrat supported Bush's recent tax-cuts when only 1 democrat did, Zell Miller. I don't know about the previous ones, but I know many, many DLCers voted against them

He also says that Clinton won because of Perot, which is a republican lie, as Perot took just as many votes away from Clinton as Bush.

And of course he has no real solutions other than to nominate Kucinich

[BayCityProgressive]

25. Actually

other Dems did vote for some of the tax cuts and they all lost in 2002. I have never voted Green but i do have respect for Nader even though I don't think he or the Green party is always right in everything they do. Then again who is?

[ulysses]

26. oh, but you don't understand.

If you don't think Ralph Nader is the antichrist, you must therefore worship him as a god. You didn't get the memo?

;-)

[w4rma]

27. The elected Democrats didn't support Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy

But, I'm not sure that the unelected DLC leadership didn't support them. And I'll bet that many of the (extremely wealthy) corporate donors to the DLC supported them.

[BayCityProgressive]

30. if the so called "special interest groups"

like the labor unions, NAACP, NOW, ACLU, League of Conservation Voters,MoveOn.org ect. don't take back our party third parties will continue to grow. I really think there is a civil war within the party for the soul and direction we will take. I think whoever wins this fight wins the party for good; we won't see any unity in the party until one side or the other is defeated. They are both ideological opposites. Just my opinion.

[Ardee]

31. Oh dear , Nader speaks up

once again with crystal clarity and the usual suspect leaps ,straining desperately against his leash to sink his foaming fangs into Ralph's leg.

As ever Nader is exactly on point with this as he has been so very many times. It is interesting to note that the attacks on him are getting less relevent and more desperate with each passing Nader condemnation of the losing strategies and the sellout democratic leadership.

In response to Naders point that From sold out to the Silicon Valley types we see a list of Naders own investments, or at least we are told that this is the case. Whether or not this is a current portfolio neither I nor the poster of that list knows.Given that Nader may have a substantial investment in those corporations he seeks to rein in makes him more of a hero not less.That most of the stocks mentioned are owned through funds which buy large blocs of many stocks while the investor purchases only the fund itself might be worth mentioning as well. When I 'greened my portfolio" some years ago, much to the dismay of my broker, the funds I held were the most difficult to green.......

In any case I for one found this article quite to the point, Naders criticisms and assessment of the democratic loses in '02 absolutely spot on. Its a real shame that the mere mention of his name brings such a paranoid and obsessive reaction because the man does indeed point the way back for the democratic party.If he does run in '04 he will do so only because he dispairs of hearing the important messages from the neoconservative democrats.Though I must add that there will be those, the paranoid, the obsessed and the followers, who jump on a bandwagon sans any attempt at finding the truth themselves, who will call him all sorts of ridiculous names, GOP spy the least of them, without a shred of proof and with the same almost religious zeal one finds in the Coulters, Hannity's, O'Reilly's, Limbaughs et al......pity.

[cherryperry]

32. To The Sushi Bandit and Scarlet W oman and Bay City Progressive:

RIGHT ON!

:toast:

[scarletwoman]

35. Thank you!

:7

sw

[depakid]

33. here we go again with Juvenile name calling, complete with the inability

to separate the source from the message.

I swear that a good 10% of otherwise intelligent posters here have developed some sort of phonetic fuse in their brains that shortcircuits their reasoning process, rendering them incapable of discussing what in any other context they would consider valid issues.

Press the "Nader" hotbotton and all rationality is supplanted by such blinding revulsion that even the most reasonable propositions may be rejected with little thought.

That, by the way, is a very common Republican "rhetorical" tactic, used most effectively in the 20th century by that crafty old master of proaganda, Joseph Goebbels.

One might hope that we here at DU, at least, are not so easily misled in the 21st Century.

[jiacinto]

38. Nader is a hypocrite

See reply #5. Why is it okay for Nader to own stocks but for no one else to do so?

[John_H]

36. "The Corporatist Ralph Nader"

http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

an article about Ralph Nader