Ralph Nader and his supporters were furious by intentional refusal to publicly recognize his candidacy in 1996 and 2000. The Democrats and Republicans pretended that he didn't exist. Now, in 2004 Nader is pretending that the Green Party Candidate for President doesn't exist. Here is an excerpt from a recent article in a major newspaper from Cairo:

"Good luck to the Greens," said Kevin Zeese, Nader's national spokesman. "Nader plans to make this a three-way race between Nader, Bush and Kerry."

The above demonstrates that Nader plans to employ the same tactic that he and his supporters didn't like when it was employed by the Democrats against Nader.

Also, one of the big complaints this year from Nader and his supporters is the efforts allegedly being made by Democrats to keep Nader off of the ballot in some states, while in Utah and perhaps some other states there are Nader supporters who are actively working to keep the Green Party Presidential Nominee (David Cobb) from being on the ballot.

These two examples of blatant hypocrisy have turned at least one Nader supporter into a strong critic of the one-time "champion of the consumer".

Since Cobb isn't campaigning for president, maybe a different perspective is worth considering.

http://www.counterpunch.org/frank08062004.html

I'm embarassed to admit that I supported Nader in 2000. What he is doing now is making a mockery out of the entire movement and everything we stand for. I can't believe anyone continues to support this man.

Another Dreamer: http://www.anotherdreamer.net

Since Nader was not the cause of the Gore loss in 2000 by any account, why be ashamed of the only candidate who isn't a moral pervert? Cobb, who is less popular than Nader within his own party, is de facto campaigning on behalf of Kerry, and Kerry is campaigning on behalf of violence and sweetheart arms contracts just like his messianic twin brother. Kerry rejects his "progressive" supporters, who will vote for him anyhow, that is, vote for the Bush agenda. Perhaps, though you offer no criticism of Nader's perspective on the world nor his record of service to our country versus that of Bush-Kerry, you are simply all randied up by Michael Moore's discovery, as publicized in Boston during the recent circus, that what Nader is doing is "SO uncool". This was all he, or anyone else so far, have been able to offer by way of criticism, but since Nader is the only candidate (now joined by Peltier) representing what M.M. and the rest of us presumably believe in, that should still be enough to sop us self-conscious herd progressives. Come to think of it, its not too late to label Eugene Debs and Sinclair Lewis as uncool, too. They were SO uncool. Boy am I glad their opponents won--hurray for "movement building"!, hurray for "progressives"!!