Re: [CUGreens] My letter to the editor

["Nancy Harvey" <nanner@totalspeed.net>]

Hi Andrew!

 This letter is fantastic.  Way to go!  HoI

You may want to change somewhat your paragraph about the CO poolls, I just
read in today's (or yesterday;s) Daily Camera that they are now very close
in the poolls.  please check the facts and change your strategy in this
section a bit.

Keep up the great work!

Nancy Harvey
Nader 2000 CO

>>>>>> Paid for by the Nader 2000 General Committee <<<<<<<<<<<<<

----- Original Message -----
From: Becci <gindin@mail.colorado.edu>
To: <cugreens@flwyd.dhs.org>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 5:37 PM
Subject: Re: [CUGreens] My letter to the editor


> Hey, I think it's great!  In fact, I'm going to print out a copy for my
> friends.
>
> Becci
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "TREXLER ANDREW STEVEN" <Andrew.Trexler@colorado.edu>
> To: <cugreens@flwyd.dhs.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:22 PM
> Subject: [CUGreens] My letter to the editor
>
>
> > I sent this to the CODaily today. I think we should send more like this
> > that add strength to the argument, as well as getting some "Forthofer
vote
> > is a vote for change" letters out
> >
> > Any thoughts
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:19:17 -0600 (MDT)
> > From: TREXLER  ANDREW STEVEN <trexler@ucsu.colorado.edu>
> > To: editor@codaily.com
> > Subject: Letter to the editor
> >
> > Dear Editor:
> >
> > several month ago, I decided to start campaigning for Green Party
> > Presidential candidate Ralph Nader, not because I believe he will win,
but
> > because I support the revolutionary political reforms that he is calling
> > for. These include, among other things,  universal healthcare, withdrawl
> > from the WTO (until it changes the current rules of global trade),
public
> > funding of public elections, an end to the War on Drugs and the
> > legalization of marijuana, and several other radical changes. As well,
he
> > is the ONLY major presidential candidate that I respect- Bush and Gore
> > have sold their souls to big business; oftentimes to the exact same
> > companies.
> > Since deciding to campign for Nader, I've gotten a lot of flack
> > from friends. "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush", "Don't waste your
> > vote!", "You're going to help overturn Roe v. Wade" etc, etc. For such
> > folks as these, I've compiled a little "Myth/Fact" sheet about this
> > election:
> >
> > Myth: A vote for Ralph Nader is a wasted vote
> > Fact: If Nader gets 5% of the national vote (nearly the same as his
> > current poll numbers), the Green Party gets nearly $15 million in public
> > funds to run a strong campaign for the Presidency in 2004. In other
words,
> > five million Nader votes changes the American political landscape for
> > decades to come.
> >
> > Myth: A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush
> > Fact: Each candidate has to earn every vote, and millions of Nader
> > supporters are one-time non-voters. I, for one, would be sitting out
this
> > election if Nader weren't running. Even if Nader does attract would-be
> > Gore voters, Colorado polls show Bush with a strong lead over Gore:
> > the race here is over already.
> >
> > Myth: If Bush wins, Roe v. Wade will be overturned
> > Fact: All of Bush's Texas Supreme Court appointees have supported a
> > woman's right to choose, A Nixon appointee wrote the Majority opinion in
> > Roe v. Wade, and Ford, Reagan, and Bush Sr. appointees have all
supported
> > it since. This is nothing more than a scare tactic.
> >
> > Myth: Gore is a stonger environmentalist than Nader
> > Fact: Gore let a shopping Mall be built over fragile wetlands in
exchange
> > for $31,000 in campaign contributions, owns $500,000 in stock in the
> > infamous Oxy Oil Co., and supports the WTO, the biggest
> > threat to the environment that the world has ever seen. Nader was
> > instrumental in creating the Environmental Protection Agency, protested
> > against the WTO in Seattle, and has been endorsed by David Brower,
> > Founder of League of Conservation Voters, Friends of the Earth, and the
> > Sierra Club
> >
> > Myth: Nader has no popular support, and he won't get 5%, so you might as
> > well vote for Gore
> > Fact: Nader drew 10,500 people who paid to hear him speak in Portland,
and
> > plans to do the same in Boston, Seattle, Minnesota, and maybe even
Denver.
> > Thousands have volunteered time to his campaign in every state, and he's
> > at right around 5% in the polls.
> >
> > Myth: Most Gore voters are really excited about his campaign, because
he's
> > going to be a progressive, populist president. Didn't you hear his
> > acceptance speech?
> > Fact: When I was in LA, even delegates used the "lesser of two evils"
> > argument to get me to vote for Gore, and I've seen one Gore-
> > Lieberman Bumpersticker in the last month, as compared to about 50 Nader
> > stickers and signs all over town.
> >
> > Myth: You should vote for Gore, because he's the lesser of two evils
> > Fact: If we continue to buy this argument, politics will only get more
> > odious and someday, there will be even less difference between the "bad
> > guy" and the "good guy"
> >
> > In this election, vote your hopes, not your fears!
> >
> > Sincerely
> >
> > Andrew Trexler
> > Boulder
> > 303-440-7754
> >
> >
>
>