Furthermore, Luke told me, "I really wish he would have been included in the debates." Luke said he wrote letters to the media saying that the third party candidates should be included. Luke asked, what makes him any better than these other guys. He knows that they are of the same age group. The exclusion didn't make sense to him, as it troubles me too.
I told Luke that I believe him. I had talked to Mr. Zober at a prior debate (PUMP / D.U.) and had gathered that understanding. But, I really wanted a letter or quote or email to have this understanding as "proof" so I could hang a hat on it.
Luke said that the letter would have to come from the campaign office. So, I went there next, on my walk home. I asked them in the office to shoot me a copy of the letter.
Nothing arrived, yet.
Today we learn that the Dems are being sued by Ralph Nader. This brings up another mention of Mr. Zober. He worked hard to block Nader from the ballot in his life before Grant Street.
Go figure. Has Mr. Zober seen the light? Or, is the storm coming from another direction?
Luke is another matter. I can see where Luke might speak up for inclusion -- yet do what he is told. Meanwhile, Mr. Zober will do what is best for his side and not what is ideal for democracy.
I'd still love to see the note that Luke wrote to media folks about debate inclusion of third party candidates.
NADER SUES DEMOCRATS, SAYING THEY SABOTAGED HIS 04 CAMPAIGN
by Maria Recio
WASHINGTON - Even as the 2008 Democratic presidential candidates prepared
to debate Tuesday night, Ralph Nader, a controversial figure from the last
two presidential campaigns, sued the Democratic Party, the Kerry-Edwards
2004 campaign and affiliated groups for allegedly sabotaging his 2004
The Democratic Party is going after anyone who presents a credible
challenge to their monopoly over their perceived voters, said Nader, the
consumer advocate who ran for president in 2004 as an independent and in
2000 as a candidate of the Green Party. Democrats blame him for draining
votes from nominee Al Gore in 2000, costing the vice president the election,
and were bent on blunting his influence in 2004.
Nader, who s weighing running again in 2008, told McClatchy Newspapers
that he d decide by the end of the year.
This lawsuit was filed to help advance a free and open electoral process
for all candidates and voters, he said. Candidate rights and voter rights
nourish each other for more voices, choices and a more open and competitive
The suit, filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, seeks
compensatory damages, punitive damages and injunctive relief to protect the
constitutional rights of both candidates and voters.
Nader accuses Democratic National Committee officials, the campaign of 04
Democratic nominee John Kerry and his running mate, John Edwards, and a
group called The Ballot Project of jointly planning a nationwide effort to
block Nader and running mate Peter Camejo from state ballots as a means to
drive into deep debt or bankrupt the Nader-Camejo campaign.
DNC spokesman Luis Miranda said the party headquarters was unaware of the
suit, but in any case, We do not comment on pending litigation.
Asked why Nader had waited until now to sue, Bruce Afran, an attorney for
Nader, said, It s precisely because everyone is thinking of 08 that Ralph
Nader wants to make sure this won t happen again to a third party
Nader said it took a long time to discover the connections of people and
organizations he felt were trying to destroy him. It s a lot of work, he
said. I m not GM. Nader s most famous confrontation was with General
Motors, which tried to undermine him during his 1960s drive for auto safety.
Democratic Party officials and allied organizations sued the Nader-Camejo
campaign in 18 state courts during the run-up to the 2004 election and
blocked him from the ballot in such key states as Pennsylvania and Oregon.
A Pittsburgh law firm, Reed Smith, successfully sued Nader for court costs
and has a judgment pending against him for more than $61,000. Nader s
lawsuit lays out what it says were undisclosed connections between the firm
and members of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which decided the case.
Today s vastly more burdensome, intricate and discriminatory
ballot-access barriers in many state laws, enacted by the two-party duopoly,
has enabled this vast Democratic Party conspiracy, Nader said.