Now we enter the reductio aburdem of third party advocacy:
Says Carrol Cox
>Nader-baiting is at least a first cousin of (or
>temporary stand-in for) red-baiting. And one of the central planks of
>the red-baiter's creed is that communists (or even liberals who have
>wandered from the narrow path of liberal virtue) are motivated by a lust
>for "purity."
What the hell are you talking about, Carroll? The last thing the CPUSA was known for was "purity;" they were tactical in the extreme, making alliances as needed, switching issue positions to fit geopolitical changes, and generally seen as subversive precisely because they "impurely" burrowed into other institutions in order to dominate them.
Explaining "Nader-Hating", as you call it, is pretty simple. He's opposing our candidate, just as George Bush is. He's an opponent, so we oppose him.
The weird thing about third party folks is that they run against the Democratic Party, and then whine and sob that Democrats are being mean to them. If Nader is a real opponent to the strategy of those working within the Democratic Party, then he will be treated as their opponent, and they will seek to defeat him, just as they seek to defeat George Bush.
Such Nader supporters may try to couch their opposition in ways that reach out to Nader's supporters, just as Dems may try to reach out to supporters of Bush, but as for the candidates Bush and Nader, the goal is defeat.
So what's to explain about Nader Hating, other than that?
Nathan