Skip to main content

View Diary: Update 2: Jill Stein Run Against Obama Spoil Election? Foreclosure settlement action (184 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The Green Party is infamous for taking Republican money even while deploring it. In the last PA Senate race, the Green candidate was 99% funded by the Republican Party. In the last Texas Governors race, the Green candidate got on the ballot only with tons of Republican help.

    And of course, there was all the Republican big bundler money for Nader in 2008.

    •  Link does not work. (0+ / 0-)

      No one here is supporting the Greens, so why got to all that trouble?

      Better question is who is funding Dems?

      Corporations give HUGE FUCKING AMOUNTS to BOTH parties, your little comment is not news.

      Don't get me started on my giving a contribution to Barack Obama because he was only going to take public money, then went for change . BO got more than any other Dem candidate from Wall Street.

      Deal with it.

      We need to get serious and push the President and Party to action on issues that mean more for the activist who pushed the Pres over the top in 2008.

      •  Yes, in the first link (0+ / 0-)

        that discusses how the GOP funded 99% of the Green Party PA Senate race, that is exactly the argument the Green Party poses - both parties take dirty money. That is true. But, that is sort of lame defense in the face of accepting "doubly-dirty" money - money raised from corporations by Republicans for Green Party candidates.

        •  ? Lessee. The link does not function. (0+ / 0-)


          see Occupy Wall Street, our Santa Fe version:


          •  link (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:


            Progressives around the country were shocked to hear that Carl Romanelli is running as the Green Party candidate for the US Senate from Pennsylvania with over 99% funding from the Republicans. The howl has gone up that the Greens are letting themselves be used by the Republican Party to keep a progressive Democrat from being elected.

            But a closer look reveals a very different picture. The actions of the Green Party of PA candidate, though quite bad, are much less so than actions that the Democratic Party routinely takes each election. In fact, the Democratic Party should own up to the blame it bears for the current electoral crisis in PA.

            Let's not beat around the bush. Getting on the ballot with 99% dirty money is a bad thing to do. The GP of PA should have given it back and said, "No thanks, we would rather not get on the ballot than do it with the funding of racist, anti-working class war criminals."

            •  Finally! Now why not accept the fact that BO (0+ / 0-)

              and our Dem leadership has taken so much money from Wall Street and other corporate interests that it has influenced policy.

              Its like the 12 steps of AA. Recognize have a problem....

              •  Why not accept? (0+ / 0-)

                As I said in my comment, both parties accept dirty money. But, even as the Green Party itself admits, accepting 99% of your donations from Republicans is flat wrong. That's their own view.

                As for your claim regarding Obama accepting money from Wall Street, that may sound bad, but as you likely know, those donations are from individuals who work for companies who some identify as "Wall Street". If a janitor who works for Merrill Lynch donated $50 to the Obama compaign, that would be considered "dirty Wall Street money". A truer measure is the size of the average donations - which was very low for Obama relative to other Presidential candidates. So, I reject your framing.

                On the other hand, its been widely proven that the Green Party is largely funded by Republicans.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site