Bush donors for Kerry

In the last few days, the Democratic attack machine has been targetting the charge that Ralph Nader's campaign has allegedly been helped by Republicans and conservatives. Democrats [sic] have never specifically charged that Nader solicited right-wing help or even that he was aware of what's going on. At least to my knowledge.

The party establishment was quick to seize on this as "proof" of Nader's hypocrisy and further evidence that they are the only real "alternative" to Republicans and that there are huge differences between the donkey party of the working man and the corporate-shills of the GOP.

So it was interesting to read a piece on Nader's website, For example, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, five of Kerry’s top 19 donors have also donated to the Bush Campaign. These include people from major US corporate interests: Citigroup ($157,806 to Kerry, $557,275 to Bush), UBS Americas ($157,450 to Kerry, $431,850 to Bush), Goldman Sachs ($155,250 to Kerry, $350,875 to Bush), Microsoft ($104,663 to Kerry, $184,040 for Bush), Morgan Stanley ($101,954 to Kerry, $557,275 to Bush). Are the Democrats and the media going to ask John Kerry to return the nearly $700,000 he has received from these donors ­ as well as from the many others who are also supporting the Republican campaign?

Some are also trying to make it an issue that Nader's newest book is being published by a house owned by Rupert Murdoch's group, though their snit fits fail to mention that the same publishing house also released Stupid White Men by Michael Moore.

It shows how desperately they are grasping at straws.

Both members of the Democratic ticket supported the Iraq invasion and the Patriot Act, two of the most odious public policy decisions of the last quarter century. Sen. Kerry has said he might appoint an anti-Roe v Wade Supreme Court justice so long as "that's not the balance of the court" before later bragging, "I voted for Judge [Antonin] Scalia," the most far right judge on the Court.

I concede that Kerry is much less pro-theocracy that President Bush and less anti-science. And Kerry has promised that if the US invades a random country for dubious reasons under his administration, he will be more careful about kissing up to Europe and the UN.

But I still think the senator and his supporters should worry less about Nader. They have a far more challenging task on their hands: how are they going to sell their candidate as being vastly different from the incumbent when his positions on the three issues that most animate the anti-Bush crowd are far more similiar to the current administration's than either would like to admit?