NYT’s Gail Collins and the ‘2nd Tier’ Presidential Candidates
Gail Collins, the columnist for the New York Times, has a problem. While regularly writing in a satirical or sometimes trivial way about the foibles of the two major Parties’ front-running presidential candidates, she can scarcely hide her disdain for the small starters, the underdogs.
In a recent column about what she saw as the repetitiveness and small-mindedness of Hillary Clinton (and her spokesman), Barack Obama and John Edwards, she took this unexplained swipe at former Senator Mike Gravel’s presence in a debate sponsored by National Public Radio:
“What the heck is Mike Gravel doing back on stage? Didn’t we get rid of him 10 or 20 debates ago?”
This dismissal may be seen by some readers as a laugh or as an impulsive throwaway line. Not so with Ms. Collins. She has little tolerance for filling media debate chairs with candidates; pundits like her believe candidates who are not front runners do not have a chance to overcome their super-low polls.
Nor does she lose any sleep over NBC (a subsidiary of General Electric) keeping the anti-nuclear Mr. Gravel out of its hosted debate in Philadelphia last month because he had not yet raised a million dollars.
Ms. Collins’ treatment of the “second tier” candidates in the Democratic Party, such as Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich, is remarkable for at least three reasons.
First, although she is a more sand-papered progressive than in her more radical, younger days as a small starter reporting for the Connecticut State News Bureau, I’ll bet she agrees with much of the two-time Senator Gravel’s record in Congress and his present positions on the war in Iraq, Presidential accountability, corporate power and crime and the mistreatment of workers, consumers and uninsured patients.
Second, for several years ending a few months ago, she presided over the New York Times editorial page, producing some of the finest editorials in the paper’s history. Many well considered subjects were included such as: standing up for whistle-blowers, dissenters, the rights of small business and workers and especially, the civil liberties and rights of minority voters afflicted with myriad electoral abuses and obstructions.
Thirdly, she has written a book about the history of women’s rights in America-titled America’s Women (William Morrow, 2003), which must have touched in a sensitive way those lonely self-starters, known as suffragettes, along with those very small parties and even smaller candidates pressing for the female voting franchise. She knows there are many ways to win short of winning an election.
In recent weeks, her paper’s editorial page has delivered brilliant excoriations of the similarities in the converging the Republican and Democratic Parties, taking the latter severely to task on important national issues.
I doubt very much that Gail Collins disagrees with these editorials. In fact, privately she is known to be even more critical of the political status quo in this country. One might surmise that she should therefore welcome more voices and choices to come before the citizenry during election times, including more third party and independent candidates as well.
After all, aren’t we all glad that ballot access was so easy in the nineteenth century, compared to today, that small parties like the anti-slavery, women’s rights, labor and farmer-populist parties got onto the ballots and pioneered hugely important agendas, ignored by the Democratic, Whig and Republican Parties? These small starters never came close to winning the Presidency, except for the populist parties, winning many Congressional elections.
Put Gail Collins back into the 19th century and she would be whooping it up for those valiant few voters and little candidates who voted and ran against the grain of the business-indentured, often bigoted major Parties. Here in the twenty-first century, Gail Collins writes the predicates of progressive values and then sprawls to the dead-end conclusions-stay with the least-worst major Party candidates.
Just as small seeds need a chance to sprout to regenerate nature and sustain humankind, just as the tiniest of businesses need to have a chance to innovate in the business world, so too, small candidates need to have the chance. For they can often enrich the political dialogue, move the big boys to overdue recognitions, even if they do not have a chance to win on election day in a rigged, monetized, winner-take all system, bereft of both instant run-off voting and proportional representation procedures.
Columnists such as Gail Collins and her humane colleague, Bob Herbert, abhor going into these fields of political fertility. Instead, their rendition of political and corporate abuses flows into the repetitive, narrow ruts of political servility-not just the two party duopoly ruts but its major candidate groovers.
So progressive columnists, such as there are, wring their hands over why the Democratic Party, its incumbents and its major candidates do not heed their findings, their pleas, their hopes for the American people. They keep on wringing their hands until they encase their minds in a cul-de-sac that categorically disallows even a contemplation that political alternatives in person and party should be given visibility.
Open your mind a little, Gail Collins, and you might learn something about the need for frameworks that enable the sovereignty of the people to be expressed in a variety of practical ways, including national initiatives. You may laugh at Mike Gravel having difficulty explaining his studious proposal for a national initiative during sound-bite debates. Instead, try writing a column on why some noted constitutional law professors believe there is a sound constitutional basis for such a proposal.
This would be a good way to spark a serious debate about the myth of government of the people, by the people and for the people. Such an excursus would help deepen a very shallow Presidential campaign and be more becoming to you than wanting to rid Mike Gravel from the so-called debates. And you and the members of your profession, who regularly confess boredom with the major candidates, might actually find some excitement in your daily work.
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions.
Well, let’s see how peaceful and democratic the Naderhaters are today.
Ms. Collins needs this wake-up call, as do her colleagues. The really fertile thought and ferment for real change lies in the programs and platforms of the so-called “second tier” candidates of both parties. They are in that situation because the corporate masters realize the threat posed to them by these candidates, and do all they can to shut off any flow of funds to these people to deny them (and us) a real voice in the debate on the future of this nation that so critically needs to happen.
From IRON HEEL by Jack London: “You have forgotten the editors. They draw their salaries for the policy they maintain. Their policy is to print nothing that is a vital menace to the established. The press of the United States? It is a parasitic growth that battens on the capitalist class. Its function is to serve the established by moulding public opinion, and right well it serves it.”
Hoa binh
just when you thought it was safe to read the times! damn.
maybe Chomsky has a point when he states that working for a corporation changes you at the molecular level.
Don’t worry Ralph. Unless the oligarchy figures out how to fully control the internet, most print media are on their way out, soon to be followed by TV and the rest of the MSM. We can read you, Chomsky, Zinn, watch you on YouTube and we can get our news from many sources online for free so why subscribe?
Just as the peace activists like Code Pink scratch their heads in confusion over the Democratic leadership in Congress voting down the line w/ Bush and his cronies it doesn’t surprise me that so many “liberal” journalists, authors, writers are confused as well. Neither progressives, liberals nor Democratic voters want to take off their rose-colored glasses! The truth is ugly…we are being lied to. Once you get over the initial shock (as I did in 2001 after the coronation of GWB) you can begin to change your community, the country and inevitably the world.
We are all in it together!
peace,
Mindy
Bye the way….. check out “An Unreasonable Man” on PBS stations this month!!! Open your mind and see why Nader is so demonized now.
Hey Gail Collins, what do the five fingers say to the face?
SLAP!!!
Well done, Mr. Nader.
Though Mike Gravel has not been in the Oct. 30th or Nov. 15th debates, nor will he be in today’s Des Moines Register debates, he is still holding his fellow Democrats accountable, and speaking as much truth to power as ever.
After his alternate debate Nov. 15th in Las Vegas, Senator Gravel was invited to the Jefferson Jackson dinner, alongside the 7 other candidates. Below is his “open letter” of sorts to the party:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nGVcjvuw6mo
looking in from the outside, it is incredible the extent to which the USA has allowed the corporate media to define the terms of the elections.
The corporate media only wans the public to see and hear the corporate candidates.
What bothers me most about the exclusion of Mike Gravel and DENNIS KUCINICH from today’s Des Moines register debate (I spit upon their lousy paper this morning - literally) aside from the act itself is the fact that any of the front runners would allow it.
Here is a party that presumably stands for the working man and labor and instead of standing together in solidarity and refusing to take part in a debate that does not include all the candidates, they move right ahead as if there is no issue here.
This is precisely the attitude that has reduced labor union members to mere cannon fodder for the corporate elite management that is only too happy to use them, abuse them, lie to them and then throw them to the dogs whenever it suits their profit purposes.
The fact that members of our society no longer stand up for union members and even other union members do not voluntarily stand with their comrades in the event of a strike is what has precipitated the demise of the middle class and the ever increasing wealth gap in this country.
While the writers union remains on strike, how come all the other unions that represent studio, transportation, actors and all other facets of the entertainment industry are not out on strike as well.
If any Democratic candidate was serious about supporting labor, they would surely stand down from today’s debate in protest. Sadly, the answer is the Democrats have long since given up on actively supporting labor. It’s time labor witholds their support for Democrats and moves on to help establish and support a third (or second) political party in this country.
Because of WTO and the rest of the trade pacts Labor has been trivialized to the point that it’s leaders are afraid to go on record for a third party candidate. My guess is that they want to back “the winner” and that is the “front runner” so that they are not seen as a spoiler and pay the price-more trivialization and less of a voice in the political arena.
I also agree generally with most of Mike Gravel’s positions, but am not too unhappy to see him excluded, because he is more of an embarrassment than an effective spokesman for progressive ideas. With his Howard Beale-like rants, he has become a national joke. He hasn’t held office in many years, and has little or no support anywhere.
The last point is the objective justification for excluding him, unlike Kucinich who has much stronger support than Dodd or Biden, and who is also a credible spokesman for the Left (though he shouldn’t have fallen through Russert’s UFO trap door).
I wrote to the DMR and in the strongest terms expressed my disgust at their exclusion of Kucinich. That’s not much, but the rest of you should do so, too.
And yes, Ralph Nader still has blood on his hands. More than he can ever wash off.
If Nader “has blood on his hands,” Nader2000 has ignorance on his brain that he can never be rid of. It was obvious some Nader hater would weigh in with that tired tune. Nader said some time back that if Hillary gets the nomination he’ll run again as independent. This will give the Nader2000’s another decade or so of Nader bashing. An inability to think beyond the end of their own hysteria will fuel their absurd commentary as it runs around in circles chasing its tail, shouting “it’s all Nader’s fault!”
As a former reporter at a big daily paper, I think Collins is probably pandering to some implied yet completely explicit editorial decree.
At big papers today, as far as my experience goes, a progressive working as a reporter lives secretly fearing ridicule or being ostracized for their opinions.
Where I worked, there was an unspoken gag rule against expressing views that were independent minded, or suspicious of the point of view established by big media or the official line, or critical of the police. You didn’t exactly know what would happen to you if you came out with it bluntly, however something would, because everyone fell into line. It was like something out of The Captive Mind, almost.
I quit that paper eventually in part because of the useless articles we (including me) were continually publishing about the Iraq war and “insurgents”. Did I have a say in this? Not at all. My stories, when I tried dealing in reality– were merely butchered into generic feel good, or scare em good pieces abouts American heroics and/or terrorists, by one of the editors.
As far as the Times is concerned, there is also Krugman, whose editorials I previously could stomach relatively well. But lately he has been tooting his horn about the major Democratic candidates’ insurance based healthcare plans. He has hardly ever mentioned the Kucinich/Conyers bill or Kucinich at all for that matter. Has he?
I see an interesting parallel between Nadar blamers and the Gail Collins of the world—they get stuck in a groove of their faulty thinking and are missing the forest for the trees. Nader has never once in his public life been anything but a passionate, articulate voice of the people, by the people and for the people. He walks the walk, and talks the talk. All the same, self-proclaimed progressives resent his “intrusion” into the political arena, even as they complain that no one in the two party duopoly represents their values. If you accept their premise, Kucinich shouldn’t be running because he takes votes away from the annointed candidiates. How do you expect change to take place if no one stands up to represent real change? Does any Dem apologist actually believe that Kucinich or Nader will be asked to the White House for their advice, if Clinton or Obama or Edwards are elected? And do you actually think that any of those three would openly embrace your views or your values??? Wake up! And start supporting and defending those who DO! You are no better than the worst of the Rethugs pointing fingers and blaming anyone, EVERYONE but themselves for the sorry state of things!
She doesn’t want to find excitement in her work. She’s somebody now, and celebrity crowds out principle in people like her. She wants to take it easy, not work too hard. Three candidates are easier to cover than eight.
Any third candidate who is progressive will take votes away from corporate Democracts, and rightfully so.
auspiciousbunny, starofthesea and Ephraim, excellent observations!
I think Ralph Nader should be honored as Man of the Century for his tireless work for our interests. He has stood up for us when others have cowered or yielded to craven interests. Most of the heroes in history were vilified in their time and I want him to know I honor him above anyone else living today. He has always seen what is wrong and what is needed to make it right and has the inner strength to persist in the face of personal attacks and attempts to blame him for the mess this country has become - which he predicted long before anyone else was paying attention. He has not singlehandedly created our problems, but he has always seen them coming. It is only those who will not accept personal responsibility for their part who keep trying to blame him.
I’m with Nader2000. Screw Ralph! Or, to paraphrase Gail Collins, the subject of this article (entitled “Let’s Pie Ralph Nader Some More…” oops! I mean, “NYT’s Gail Collins and the ‘2nd Tier’ Presidential Candidates”):
“What the heck is (Ralph Nader) doing back on stage? Didn’t we get rid of him (6 years) ago?”
I’m assuming that the “blood on his hands” statement applies to the theory that Nader’s run in 2000 enabled the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the vote recount in Florida, thus propelling Bush into the White House, hence the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
I totally agree. Just as smoothly as a game of Mousetrap, Nader enabled a Bush presidency, and forever erased the memory of Slick Willie and his sidekick Madeline’s embargo on Iraq. Bush, you dumbass! Don’t go to war against Iraq, just put sanctions on them! Sure, that’ll cost… let’s see, was it 500,000 Iraqi lives, mostly children? Yeah. But it’s sanctions, dammit! Unlike war, there’ll be NO BLOOD on your hands. And “we think the price is worth it.”
So damn you forever, Ralph Nader! Your big ol’ ego has ruptured the hull of a once-infallible U.S. democracy, and affected the decision-making of former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor (all she wanted to do was retire, you big thug). Why don’t you move to a country that actually WANTS a government that is representative “of the people, by the people, and for the people?”
BeForKids, I wholeheartedly agree. Nader is one of the clearest examples of someone who actually has worked hard to address the real causes of problems. He has demonstrated what I consider an extremely reasonable, sane approach to problem solving. He doesn’t create some fantasy world of words. He has over the years tirelessly addressed problems using the appropriate means in a democracy to do so. We should be very glad he exists at all in this country today.
But nevermind the Nader bashers. They get tiresome. They generally can’t control their own emotions long enough to think about anything too deeply.
Barn Burner you’re at least partially right. But the point of this that goes beyond WTO and the corruption of the unions themselves by management apologists and timid negotiators is that unions have been marginalized by the lack of solidarity among this country’s citizens.
Most people don’t understand that the benefits they have and are losing today were won by the blood, sweat and tears of workers generations ago. When I was young crossing a picket line in my town would’nt even have been thought of regardless of how much I may have wanted that bottle of milk.
Now no one seems to realize that to acheive success for workers, maintain the middle class and allow opportunities for the poor, we must all recognize the ties that bind our own individual success with the success of others. This is what is broken in our society and what will be necessary to heal if we are to withstand the collapse of the empire and build stonger communities.
Union members themselves have fallen prey to the divide and conquer tactics being used against them in labor negotiations. Management negotiators constantly move to drive wedges between retirees, current workers and new hires into three camps. Republicans and Democrats alike drive wedges between the classes and at the low end of the scale the lower wage class is always being played against undocumented immigrant populations in an attempt to push apart those with essentially common goals and common conditions to make sure that a common purpose does not coalesce into a movement that threatens the status quo, the ruling elite, or the corporate agenda.
Unless we all learn a little courage like that shown by those supporting the labor movements years ago, and stop acting only in our own self-interest, the economic gap in this country will continue to grow until outright revolution becomes the only solution.
Courage by a Democrat? What am I thinking?
How did I start on this again?
Oh yeah Kucinich/Nader 2008 - Independent ticket - Screw the DEMS
Love those Nader haters -I’m Polish, but even the Polack who broke his leg falling off the ball washer wasn’t that d**b!
(Intellectually challenged)
starofthesea has made a very good comparison between the Nader haters and the Gail Collins-type “journalists”.
As for the other Dem candidates boycotting the debate until everyone is included—HAH!!! This is exactly what Clinton and Edwards were plotting when they were caught on that open mike earlier in the campaign. They welcome the exclusion of Gravel and Kucinich.
If your media trivializes lesser voices, boycott them. If your party trivializes lesser voices, boycott them. They don’t have any power unless we give it to them. The first thing we need to do to empower ourselves is to vote for our principles in the primaries.
Who cares about what kind of new puppet we get for our votes.
Follow The Money!!! that is where our rights went… down the money hole.
same old faces, rockerfellers, mellons, rothshilds, you know BANKING ELITES.
These are the enemy of the people, these are the ones who call the shots in a fascist state, Hitler was a fall guy for industrialists (grampa Bush) George is a fall guy, he always was. A disposable shill for the corporatized military, oil, banks, media and organized crime. Yes not unlike the former USSR, our government is mainly a mafia, a waspy, soft bellied mafia. Strike them NOW.
The powers that be will pick their man and tell him he will win if Jeb Bush is his running mate. Too far fetched? Don’t be too sure.
I don’t think there’s any point in responding to people like Daniel David or Nader2000, they’re just shills for corporate whores. And the union activists didn’t just give up blood sweat and tears for us, in many cases they gave up their lives. Because of them we have weekends and minimum wages. We’ve lost the benefits and in many cases the overtime they died for (temporary workers, anyone). And the Democrats just get out of the way and let it happen.
And those lying Democrats keep on making empty promises to the stupid voters while they keep their promises to the corporations that have bought them. What amazes me is how often these voters keep coming back to be tricked again. Anne Wilson Schaef wrote “When Society Becomes an Addict” which explains why the public has allowed itself to become triangulated by the Republicans and Democrats into voting for the “lesser of two evils”, keeping us on the path of corporate hegemony. It’s the same codependent behavior that keeps an enabler buying alcohol for their drunken spouse. In a personal relationship one can get out. What do we do on a national level? I know some have left this country and they’re glad they did. There’s a lot of people trapped due to lack of resources, and convinced that they are powerless to create change. Those who have stolen our money and natural resources (and everyone else’s) aren’t going to give it up. Blackwater, anyone?
The NYT has something in common with all the other vaunted US institutions whatever their category, private or public: it’s broken. It doesn’t work. And it deals with nothing but useless fluff.
When you read a news item, it’s too late. What’s happened has happened. And so much happens every minute that no one can keep up with it, let alone DO anything about it.
Start with yourself. Improve your ability to think critically, to look deep within. Create peace within yourself and enhance your knowledge of life and how to live it in health and happiness, doing good for yourself and the world.
Service, devotion, right action, love. Do the best you can in your life, don’t mind the blather. Potent forces for positive change, the likes of which have never existed before, are on duty at all times. And a better world is coming, though there’ll be plenty of kicking and screaming as the whole thing gets dragged along into what’s better.
Nature always has the upper hand.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but couldn’t Gore have run on a stronger environmental platform which would have kept Nader from “stealing” as many votes as he did?
I do not want Dennis Kucinich to be president, we need people like him as legislators. (I still haven’t heard him say any combination military, industrial, and complex, which makes me wonder how much of a leader he really is).
Gravel looks like a buffoon because his positions require more explaining than he was given to explain them during debates and he was not asked questions of substance. He shook things up regardless. More people really should be mad.
You might remember that the worst suffering under the Iraq sanctions were in the immediate post-war period before the evil Clintonites got the oil-for-food program going. But yeah, Clinton failed to go much beyond that in terms of undoing the policy Papa Bush had left in place. Clinton was pretty much about sucking. Baby Bush is a whole lot worse.
500,000 vs. 1,000,000? Well, you see, that’s a choice you have to make, Mr. and Ms. America. You don’t get to opt out. And it doesn’t wash off.
Clinton killed about 1,000,000 Iraqis during his 8 year term.
Bush has killed about 1,000,000 Iraqis in his term.
The only difference is the choice of weapons. Starvation and the denial of medical care versus bombs and bullets.
Just the fact that there is STILL such hatred toward Nader after 7 years tells you all you need to know about the nasty, despicable, hateful nature of the Democrats.
That, and they continually want to blame others for their own failures. For instance, remember that 41 Democratic Senators could have banded together to run a filibuster that could have stopped ANYTHING Bush has done in the last 8 years. If you don’t like John Ashcroft or Gonzales as AG, well remember the Dems could have stopped them from taking that office if they’d wanted. If you don’t like the war in Iraq, the Dems could have blocked its authorization or denied it funding at any time.
So the constant hateful whining bleat that its all Nader’s fault is just the Dems trying to deflect attention away from their own constant support and approval of Republican polices.
And its that constant Dem support and approval of Republican policies that was the reason for the Nader campaign in the first place.
The only way things could have been really different today is if that pro-war, corporate tool Al Gore hadn’t stolen all those votes away from Nader. For years now, the only real vote for change has been to vote Green. Its those silly Dems who keep stealing votes away from that force for change that are the reason we are here today.
Doubt me, go read today’s article’s on how the Dems have once again given Bush everything he wants in this year’s budget bill. If you keep voting Dem, you’ll keep being screwed by the Dems.
I think we should just shorten our message with this political t-shirt
Corporate Media - Chosen
Candidate in 2008!
anyone who votes in this putrid fish bowl - environment is only serving to legitimate the sytematic corruption. Do you really think the Electoral College (GE-NBC , CBS , Clinton News Network, etl al ) will give amention to a left candidate who gets a tiny amount of votes. PEOPLE WITH THIS DELUSION ARE ONLY LEGITIMATING A SYTEM THAT COULD MAKE A SEWER SYSTEM BLUSH ,,,I mean if they were capable of fealing any emotions…..
If you aren’t going to vote at all, please explain exactly how you are going to change things.
geoff29 December 13th, 2007 12:25 pm
“Just when you thought it was safe to read the times! damn.
Maybe Chomsky has a point when he states that working for a corporation changes you at the molecular level.”
Do you have any doubt?
LAST WEEK RALPH WROTE ABOUT CORPORATE UMBILICAL CORDS AND TODAY GAIL COLLINS! WOW!
HOW EDIFYING. PROFOUND. GERMAINE TO THE LIFE & DEATH ISSUES PARALYZING OUR WORLD…..? WAIT! NO! THESE ARTICLES WERE ABOUT AS RELEVANT AS RALPH HIMSELF! GAIL WHO? THANK GOD HE DIDN’T WRITE ABOUT THE IRAQ WAR, A WAR WE WOULD NOT BE IN IF IT WERE NOT FOR HIS ******* EGO.
THERE IS NOT BLOOD ON HIS HANDS. HE LIVES IN LUXURY. THERE IS A RIVER OF BLOOD RUNNING THROUGH THE STREETS OF IRAQ THAT HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THOUGH. PERIOD. REAL HUMAN MISERY AND DEATH RALPHY. REAL. GET IT? GET IT? GAIL WHO? GET IT? GET IT?
NADERHATER? YES.
AND ABOVE I SAW CHOMSKY’S NAME IN THE SAME SENTENCE AS RALPHIES. LET’S NOT DO THAT TO THE BEAUTIFUL AND ILLUMINATING NOAM.
AND FOR THE SHRILL DEFENDERS OF RALPHY: ME THINKETH THOU DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH……(VERY FIRST POST, VERY FIRST) PROBALY PUT THERE BY THE EGO HIMSELF.
COMarc
> Clinton killed about 1,000,000 Iraqis during his 8 year term.
> Bush has killed about 1,000,000 Iraqis in his term.
You, sir, have no respect for the truth.
Iraq suffered heavily under the sanctions which were imposed originally by the UN during GHW Bush’s presidency. The policy of not allowing the sanctions to be lifted was started during GHW Bush’s presidency. The worst years of Iraqi suffering were the first postwar years, 1991-1992, with infrastructure and war damage unrepaired and the country under quarantine. Under the oil-for-food program, set up in 1995 under Clinton’s presidency, the worst of this suffering was relieved and malnutrition was no longer widespread in Iraq.
I personally blamed Clinton for keeping the sanctions on and not doing more, and I organized protests of Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright over this issue, but the policy under Clinton cannot be held responsible for 1 million deaths in Iraq.
To compare the malign neglect of Clinton’s Iraq policy with brutal imperial terrorism of the Iraq invasion under George W. Bush is a completely dishonest attempt at handwashing for the consequences of Ralph Nader’s intentional and decisive contribution to Al Gore’s defeat and GW Bush’s accession to power in the White House.
I apologize for upsetting you, mikepeters. I should’ve spelled “Naderhaters” with a ‘z’ at the end.
Wow, you read these comments and it becomes apparent that Nader-bashers are truly buffoons. I mean, cut the ranting and face the fact that Gore dug his own grave, and the Democrats continue to dig themselves grave after grave by cow-towing to corporate interests and voting in line with Republicans.
They lost my vote and millions of others with their watered-down compromises and corporate butt-licking.
It’s really telling that the Democrats refuse to admit their own mistakes, and instead find someone else to blame. I don’t want people like that running my country, and will again throw my vote in with whoever is a real person who runs on a platform about caring about real people.
Oh my god, Nader-haters and Clinton apologists. Bleah. Corporate brainwashing worked.
COMarc - If you keep voting Dem, you’ll keep being screwed by the Dems.
This is precisely why I will be voting a straight Republican ticket in 2008.
It’s obvious the Clinton wing is not going to lose control of the Democratic Party until it is defeated a number of times, and is forced out by the electorate. Unfortunately, the only mechanism we have to defeat the Clintonites at this point is the GOP.
Of course we will undoubtedly suffer some losses by electing Republicans - Roe v. Wade, Medicare, separation of church and state, who knows - but we’ve been losing those things anyway with the Democrats in power. We’re probably not going to make things too much worse by electing Republicans, and even if we do, it will only provide more incentive for voters to elect progressives.
A friend of mine posted this in Americablog and with permission I reprint it… It says alot….
“Have you heard about the 1.9 MILLION disenfranchised black voters ?
Have you heard about the black box voting problem?
The Supremes stopping vote counting to hand it to Bush?
The robo-calling with fraudulent messages before the election?
All those things would have still happened if Ralph Nader had never been born.
The GOP stole the 2000 election because
THAT’S WHAT THEY DO.
They also stole the 2004 election and would have stolen the 2006 election, but the Mark Foley scandal at the last minute threw off their calculations… no time to reset the black boxes.
Ralph is not to blame for the Republicans stealing the election. And any votes the Dems lost, they lost fair and square by not acting like vertebrates.
Linda | 10.16.07
.
Logic, reason and evidence overwhelmingly point to the need to overthrow the government and abolish capitalism. Voting is a waste of time and in the USA is an anti democratic sham.
People please be honest with yourselves and get guns and prepare to fight against the forces of power and deceit in this country. This country is not based on non-violence. In fact the opposite is the case. Bush is right, if you don’t fight against the evil doers, people like Bush, then you will lose, you will get killed.
WOW. NADER LOVERS ARE REAL ABSOLUTISTS. THINGS ARE NOT RELATIVE IN THEIR CONVENIENT LITTLE WORLDS! ALL GOOD ALL BAD MOMMY!
AL GORE AND GW BUSH ARE THE SAME THING HUH? AND ONE OF YOU GENIUSES CALLED ME A BUFFOON? GOSH, HOW WILL I SLEEP TONITE?
AL GORE HAS DONE MORE FOR MANKIND (AND HE IS NOT DONE) THAN RALPH’S EGO HAS EVER EVER DONE-DUM DUM WAS BLOWING HIS HORN VIS A VIS EMISSION STANDARDS IN THE SEVENTIES! THAT WAS HIS BIG CRUSADE, HELLO? NADER’S CAUSE DE CELEBRE’ WAS EMMISIONS & DETROIT! WELL GEE, SHUCKS! LOOK AT ALLLLL THE PROGRESS THAT’S BEEN MADE THERE! THAT IS RALPH IN ACTION! OH WAIT. THAT WAS A TOTAL ABSOLUTE, THAT IS ABSOLUTE FAILURE-SO LET’S MOVE ONTO SOMETHING ELSE TO KEEP OUR NAME IN PRINT AND FORGET ABOUT DETROIT EMISSIONS-(MAYBE LET SOMEONE MORE CAPABLE TAKE ON THE RESULTS OF THAT FAILURE-GLOBAL WARMING-THIRTY YEARS LATER-THAT IS AL GORE YOU “BUFFOONS”
YES I MIKE PETERS AM SICKENED BY THIS OLD WINDBAG, HIS EGO AND HIS IDIOT ACOLYTES. ALL OF WHICH WOULD BE TRITE BUT FOR 2000. WHEN NADERZ EGO AND THE MORONS WHO VOTED FOR HIM (BUSH) PUT GW ON THE THRONE AND SET IN MOTION THE INVASION OF IRAQ. POSSIBLY THE GREATEST FOREIGN POLICY DEBACLE IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND INCALCULABLE AS AN INSTRUMENT OF HUMAN SUFFERING AND DEATH. BUT YOU ARE PROUD! YOU NADERLOVERZ SHOULD BE. OF YOUR BREATHTAKING IGNORANCE.
BRING IT ON. BRING IT ON.
You are right again, Ralph.
mikepeters; Could be you the exhaust fumes got to you in the seventies. Blame the Republicrats, not Ralph Nader for what GWB has done. I suggest you do some research, my friend.
And by the way, when the coward-in-chief said “bring it on”, our men and women in uniform should have said, “SIR,NO SIR”. Go buy the film, mike, and while you’re at it, do research on ‘The Christmas Truce of 1914′ and see what is possible if cannon fodder unite and think for themselves.
Happy Holidays
what was the senator’s name? the one who ran for president and was told by gail collins that she was a vanity candidate? oh, yes. caroline braun. a vanity candidate because she only made sense. and here we have more vanity candidates’ names: mike gravel, dennis kucinich. oh, you say kucinich is the only candidate who makes sense? i agree. that is why i understand her column to be a vanity column.
OUR PERSPECTIVES ASIDE, IT WAS NICE OF YOU, PEACEMAN, TO SIGN OFF WITH THE WORDS HAPPY HOLIDAYS, THE BEST OF HOLIDAYS TO ALL WHO HAVE POSTED ABOVE, ALL.
MOST SINCERELY, MDP.
If you look at the way people voted in 2000, it is not so easy to blame Nader. In Florida, CNN’s exit polling showed Nader taking the same amount of votes from both Republicans and Democrats: 1 percent. Nader also took 4 percent of the independent vote.
At the same time, 13 percent of registered Democrats voted for Bush!
Gore couldn’t hold his own base (he couldn’t even win in his home state of Tennessee) and because of this, he lost. Blame Gore, not Nader.
The Democrats also don’t say one word about the fact that 13 percent of their own party members voted for Bush.
I don’t know if I’ll ever understand USA politics. It seems completely wrong to blame Nader for exercising his political right to run for president. I suppose the Nader people could equally say all the people who voted for Gore are at fault: if they had voted for Nader then Bush would not have been elected!
See the DVD “An Unreasonable Man”… Ralph Nader is a national treasure!
Correction: See the DVD, “An Unreasonable Man”… Ralph Nader is a national treasure, as is Noam Chomsky and Chalmers Johnson.
To mike peters, nader 2000 and all the other demopublicans,
Denial is such a powerful thing. It actually creates an artificial reality in the minds of the people who are stuck in it. With all the evidence around since the 2000 election, not the least important of which is that Al Gore ACTUALLY WON THE ELECTION BY OVER 500, 000 VOTES, See Washington Post, NY Times in June or JUly of 2001 when all the newspapers investigated the election etc. and counted cards etc. But….I guess when you are as spineless, corrupt, mindless and rotten to the core as most of the Demopublicans are, what else can you say but, “That Nader forced Pelosi, and Reid and the other stiffs to go along with every evil and corrupt policy of the Bush Gang”. It’s all Nader’s fault. What an Ego!!!!!!
You guys are so pathetic…
Ralph Nader is one of the greatest americans who ever lived, bar none. He has done more for the human race than any man alive, and I guess that what upsets these ASSHOLES SO MUCH!!!
asoka—your good statistical analysis of the voting would be useful if the Nader blamers were rational, but unfortunately, it would appear they are stuck in a rant that will not let them think or move on. It is sadly facinating how much hate an intelligent man like Ralph Nader can provoke in certain people. I honestly do not get it! ! Ralph is indeed a national treasure!
Mikepeters; You are a gentleman. And I’m sincere about the holiday quote. Many of us disagree on a host of topics and issues, and some of the diatribes hurled back and forth amongst the Common Dreamers are over the limit, in my opinion, but most present their views with a genuine concern for the problems of the day.
Typing this reply, the post above this (asoka; 1;12am) says it all about the 2000 vote, Mike. Look how many Dems voted for Bush. Also, don’t ever be hoodwinked into believing (like most non-thinking Americans do) that there are only two parties to choose from. The Democrats have helped Bush all along, especially Ms. Clinton. Nader is lily white compared to the ‘DUOPOLY’ of the corrupt d&r’s.
Look how the Dems backstabbed Kucinich in tonights debate.
That’s it. The kid’s fallin’ asleep at the keyboard.
asoka - I don’t know if I’ll ever understand USA politics.
It’s pretty simple, actually. All you have to do is follow the Congressional voting record, which shows that the Republican Party is almost totally conservative, while the Democratic Party is about 70/30 conservative/liberal. Since most conservative Democrats vote with the GOP, it follows that the political makeup in this country is in reality 85% conservative and 15% liberal. With only 15% of the vote in a system based on majority rule, progressives have little to no political power. It will likely remain this way unfortunately until there is another crisis on the order of the Great Depression or WW2.
asoka wrote:
> “If you look at the way people voted in 2000, it is not so easy to blame Nader. In Florida, CNN’s exit polling showed Nader taking the same amount of votes from both Republicans and Democrats: 1 percent. Nader also took 4 percent of the independent vote.”
Anyone who thinks Nader took as many votes from Bush as from Gore thinks people have no opinions or ideological leanings and vote without a clue as to what the candidates stand for (generally at least). This is as absurd a view as the claim that “large majorities” of Americans are well-enough versed in the issues and strong enough supporters of progressive ideas that the candidates can talk like Nader and ignore what the corporate media will do to them.
Maybe Nader got 1% of registered Republicans in Florida and not more than 1% of registered Democrats, but the majority of those “independents” would be liberals who would likely have voted for Gore. In fact, most of them were probably the kind of people who read CommonDreams and don’t register as Democrats because they don’t like the spineless corporate sellouts.
> “At the same time, 13 percent of registered Democrats voted for Bush!”
Which goes to show you how far the country has moved to the right under the relentless propaganda onslaught of the corporate media, and puts the lie to another handwashing excuse of the Naderites, “See, maybe Gore would have lost even bigger if Nader hadn’t pushed him to the left.” Nor does this crossover voting get the Naderites off the hook via that other excuse, “See, it’s Gore’s fault for being such a lousy candidate that people went for Bush instead.”
> “It seems completely wrong to blame Nader for exercising his political right to run for president.”
Oh, wonderful, why don’t we all exercise our political rights and run for president, then? How many presidents are we going to have? How many ways are we going to split the non-Republican vote? How many people pay how high a price for Nader’s “exercising his political right to run” and voters “voting their conscience”? Yeah, it’s all about you, Ralph, and it’s all about you, Mr. and Ms. I’m-Not-Complicit-My-Hands-Are-Clean.
FreeQuark: Your numbers are a bit pessimistic. Americans are way more liberal than the drivel they are inundated with by the media, and majorities do support progressive positions when polled. The trouble is that no more than a small margin, 5% or so, is reasonably well informed about the issues or pays much attention to the news other than the most major developments. The rest can easily be spun by the corporate propaganda machine. This means the base of “progressives” who can be mobilized into a movement or party is rather narrow. However, if we progressives will adopt a realistic political strategy and organize ourselves to lead our neighbors, working through the Democratic Party, we will find a lot more latent support out there than you imagine, enough to win actual victories.
Wait a minute… “Which goes to show you how far the country has moved to the right under the relentless propaganda onslaught of the corporate media..” yet “Americans are way more liberal than the drivel they are inundated with by the media, and majorities do support progressive positions when polled?” Which is it?
Oh, I understand. The facts are whatever convict the evil Greens and exonerate the savior Democrats at the moment. It’s psychologically easier to blame someone weaker than you rather than examine your own flaws, the flaws of the system you live under, or to really stand up to evil.
It’s not the 12% or the 47.9%, it’s that damn 4%! Out, damned spot!
Incidentally (and preemptively), I personally know it’s easy to morally cave in to fear and systemic corruption because I voted a straight Democratic ticket in the last election. I’m not pointing any fingers I haven’t pointed at myself as well, and will surely have innumerable opportunities to point at myself in the future.
The big machine has taught us to worship the big machine. We vote for those likely to be winners because we are constantly told we are nothing if we don’t somehow associate our own identities with the winner’s. The plutocrats have used applied psychology masterfully. I don’t necessarily mean it’s a conspiracy of history. It maybe the natural devoloution of culture as Huxley prophesied.
I find that even a non-conformist like myself succumbing to it, having thoughts that Mike Gravel is probably too nuts to be President as much as I like him. I find myself wanting to believe in Oprahbama, because the media is so very effective in exploiting my desires. Indeed, the big machine is extraordinarily good at creating desires I didn’t even know I had. Capitalists love addictions. They can even make mega-bucks in curing them. Okay, I’m starting to rant here, but I think that Gravel is not a marketable commodity, and that effects the sub-consciousness of Gail Collins and hundreds of millions of the rest of us. More power to Ralph Nader and everyone mentally tough enough to withstand the onslaught of “manufactured consent”. I will vote for one among their number, maybe even Mike Gravel.
The thing about the Lesser-Evilists is that this lame excuse for a philosophy is solipsistic.
The Nader-hating boils down to pathological rage at Nader for not buying into their L-E view, and graciously standing aside or supporting Democratic candidates instead of challenging them.
That’s why they’re not fazed by the simple truth that Nader’s running for president, as every American child is (or was) taught is a prerogative of even ordinary citizens, is not the heinous criminal treachery they make it out to be.
To them, it must be a sign of willful madness or badness. Any “right-thinking” person, they believe, would want to give the lame, corporate centrist Democratic candidate du jour every advantage.
I’ve said it before, I’ve said it again: this apoplectic rage and scorn towards “purists” is at least in part due to the fact that they’ve jumped into putrescence up to their necks, and are furious at those who refuse to join them in the decayed gutpile of truly progressive Democratic ideals left over from the FDR-LBJ era.
Actually, Naderhaterz accuse Greens of solipsism. “It’s all about you,” and all that crap. I wouldn’t accuse all Naderhaterz of solipsism, but I suspect the ones that do accuse Greens of it do so out of psychological projection. ‘If someone doesn’t vote how I want them to, they must be motivated by selfishness!’
So not only do Naderhaterz accuse Greens of purism, but also, contradictorily, of being motivated solely by ego. My problem is not the view that voting for Nader was a mistake, but that it was intentional, premeditated destructiveness–as if we all should’ve known 9/11 was coming and how Bush would react. As far as I remember, both candidates were talking pretty moderately at the time.
It seems to me the Naderhaterz argument ultimately is that the only truly moral thing to do is to not follow one’s conscience. Or that only their conscience is right, and deep down we all know it, which seems to me to be a fairly puritanical, illiberal perspective. More projection, perhaps?
On the other hand evil is, by my observation, inherently more powerful than good, so lesser-evilism as a philosophy might have some validity.
mikepeters & Nader2000:
It’s always cute to have the ignorant little snots troll around the comment thread of any Nader article. It’s far easier for you to point the finger at Nader than look inside yourselves and our national character as to how severely fucked in the head we are.
In BOTH 2000 AND 2004, Nader approached Gore and Kerry. He presented them with the key issues to emphasize that would win the Democrats the election. Issues in the BEST INTEREST of the American people, things that would actually distinguish the Democrats. Things like, oh, universal healthcare. Now that Al Gore is out of the political arena, he calls for universal single-payer. Kerry said something to the effect they were “too liberal.”
Until the Democrats have any integrity and courage whatsoever, you can continue to hate yourselves for being little passive aggressive pussies. When you’re tough enough to make a principled stand, maybe we’ll get somewhere.
Stop being such haters. Gag on your own bile and corroded ideals.
barely human:
> “Wait a minute… “Which goes to show you how far the country has moved to the right under the relentless propaganda onslaught of the corporate media..” yet “Americans are way more liberal than the drivel they are inundated with by the media, and majorities do support progressive positions when polled?” Which is it?”
It’s both. What the polls that show “large majorities” for progressive positions are telling us is that we could mobilize support for these positions and win if we were either sufficiently well organized independently of the mass media or else if we controlled the debate in the mass media. Neither is the case. The mass media has driven the range of allowable discussion way to the right. We have had our own voices and, as Orwell predicted, even our language has been taken away. You can’t make up for this by standing as one man against the wind and letting the media mock you, or by standing apart as a tiny margin of well-versed and committed progressives, speaking a language most people don’t understand.
> “not only do Naderhaterz accuse Greens of purism, but also, contradictorily, of being motivated solely by ego.”
I don’t know why you think that is a contradiction. Purity is an egotistical fetish, “I am the pure one.”
> “It seems to me the Naderhaterz argument ultimately is that the only truly moral thing to do is to not follow one’s conscience.”
If your pursuit of purity and handwashing causes planetary-scale harm, where is your conscience?
It seems to me that following one’s conscience ought to involve taking account of the foreseeable consequences of one’s actions. That is what Ralph Nader and his supporters maniacally refused to do.
little brother:
The alternative to lesser evil is greater evil.
Nader2000- You cannot “Take Votes” from anyone– You vote for who you vote for. You want to demonize all those who vote their conscience, for the earth and for people- and blame THEM for Bush “winning” the white house??
What about all of those intellectual heavyweights who actually DID cast their vote for Bush?… Do you think they possibly have a role in his presidency?
What country do you want to live in? I for one and tired of compromising, and tired of voting for someone I don’t genuinely believe in.
Why don’t we have a conversation about those Americans out there who know nothing about the world and genuine leadership- instead of those “spoilers” who vote for real people. They are the problems. Nader2000s are the problems.
Kucinich 2008- If not now, then when?
“We have had our own voices and, as Orwell predicted, even our language has been taken away. You can’t make up for this by standing as one man against the wind and letting the media mock you, or by standing apart as a tiny margin of well-versed and committed progressives, speaking a language most people don’t understand.”
Then how does one make up for it? By using corrupt language? Seems to me Orwell argued political language should be as exact as possible–i.e. purity should be persued.
“If your pursuit of purity and handwashing causes planetary-scale harm, where is your conscience?”
Let’s be exact here, it’s the Republicans’ persuit of their definition of purity that is actually doing the actual harm, not the Greens. If the Greens are culpable, it’s less so, as negligent bystanders. Especially considering all the election fraud that went on. Again, it seems to me you guys are obsessively focusing a major part of your wrath at very minor players.
“Purity is an egotistical fetish, “I am the pure one.””
Seems to me it’s just the opposite–motivated by a feeling that one is not good enough (perhaps even worthless) and must become better or even perfect.
“It seems to me that following one’s conscience ought to involve taking account of the foreseeable consequences of one’s actions.”
Again, I disagree that 9/11 and the Bush administration’s reaction were forseeable to the degree and to the numbers that you seem to suggest. Especially considering how moderate both major candidates were talking.
“The alternative to lesser evil is greater evil.”
Then why not support waterboarding in lieu of worse forms of torture? Or nuclear power in lieu of carbon derivatives? Or wiretapping in lieu of mass arrests? Or pre-emptive ’surgical strikes?’
THANK YOU. BEING CALLED AN ASSHOLE AND AND IGNORANT LITTLE SNOT HAS BEEN EDIFYING.
DEMONSTRATES CLEARLY THAT NADER AND HIS SUPPORTERS ARE AN EVEN UGLIER BUNCH THAN I’D THOUGHT.
VITUPERATIVE PROFANITY REFLECTS SUCH INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY.
NOW I JUST FEEL SORRY FOR ALL OF YOU. I GUESS THE RIVERS OF BLOOD ON ALL OF YOUR HANDS ARE EATING AWAY AT THE PLACE WHERE THOSE WITH AWARENESS HAVE A CONSCIENCE. FROM MY HEART, YOU ARE ALL QUITE SAD AND PATHETIC IN YOUR DESPERATION, YOUR PROTESTING TOO MUCH.
I SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLUED IN SEEING ALIASES LIKE “WOODY” ((WHERE IS FRUED? HOW SAD FOR YOU IS IT LITTLE WOODY!) AND BARELY HUMAN….GUESS SHE SHOULD KNOW. EMAIL ME YOUR MAILING ADDRESSES AND I’LL SEND YOU SOME BALLS.
GOD I’M CRACKING UP. YOU WANNABES ARE SO FAR BELOW THE BAR OF THOSE WITH ACTUALL MINDS I’M FLOORED. WOW. THANKS FOR THE LAUGHS LITTLE CHILDREN.
LAST POST: KLAUS, YOUR DIGNITY IN DIALOGUE WAS DEAD ON.
NADER2000: CHECK THIS, THE CREEP IS “UNDECIDED” ABOUT WHETHER TO RUN NEXT YEAR. SOUNDS LIKE HE’S WAITING FOR MORE $$$ TO BE THROWN AT HIM BY THE REPUBLICANS. THEY WILL. THEY OWE HIM.
YOU READING THIS RALPH? YOU ARE SO LOW. SO LOW.
It’s in all caps, therefore it must be true.
I think all of the lives Ralph saved by getting us MANDATORY SEAT BELTS would easily out number the lives lost in BUSH’S WAR!!! Why don’t you people do some research before you start throwing stones?
I would vote for Ralph again in a heartbeat! He is the only one who actually stands for something, that has fought the corporations and won, who represents Us, the American People!
To mikepeters and the other political bigots above:
If you want to see what’s REALLY low, go to the Common Dreams front page, on the right-hand column, and read this:
http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/1214-03.htm
Or watch this:
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/10/31/ralph_nader_files_lawsuit_accusing_democratic
The overtly illegal and unethical behavior of the corporate Democrats you worship is MUCH worse than anything Nader has ever done. Your life is better in a hundred ways because of the legislation that Nader is directly responsible for:
National Automobile and Highway Traffic Safety Act (1965)
Clean Water Act (1968)
Clean Air Act (1970)
Co-Op Bank Bill (1978)
Law establishing Environmental Protection Agency (1970)
Consumer Product Safety Act
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Mine Health and Safety Act
Whistleblower Protection Act
Medical Devices safety
Nuclear power safety
Mobile home safety
Consumer credit disclosure law
Pension protection law
Funeral home cost disclosure law
Tire safety & grading disclosure law
Wholesome Meat Act
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act
Wholesome Poultry Product Act
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 1970
Safe Water Drinking Act
Freedom of Information Act
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
He also founded or sponsored the following organizations that benefit our society:
American Antitrust Institute
Appleseed Foundation
Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest
Aviation Consumer Action Project
Buyers Up
Capitol Hill News Service Center for Concerned Engineering
Center for Auto Safety
Center for Insurance Research
Center for Justice and Democracy
Center for Science in the Public Interest
Center for the study of Responsive Law - 1969
Center for Women Policy Studies
Citizen Action Group
Citizen Advocacy Center
Citizen Utility Boards
Citizen Works
Clean Water Action Project
Clearinghouse for Professional Responsibility
Congress Project
Congress Watch
Congressional Accountability Project
Connecticut Citizen Action Group
Consumer Project on Technology
Corporate Accountability Research Group
Critical Mass Energy Project
Democracy Rising
Disability Rights Center
Equal Justice Foundation
Essential Information
FANS (Fight to Advance the Nation’s Sports)
Fisherman’s Clear Water Action Group
Foundation for Taxpayers and Consumer Rights
Freedom of Information Clearinghouse
Global Trade Watch
Government Purchasing Project
Health Research Group
Litigation Group
Multinational Monitor
National Citizen’s Coalition for Nursing Home Reform
National Coalition for Universities in the Public Interest
National Insurance Consumer Organization
Ohio Public Interest Action Group
Organization for Competitive Markets
Professional Drivers (PROD)
Professionals for Auto Safety
Public Citizen
Pension Rights Center
Princeton Project 55
PROD - truck safety
Public Citizen’s Visitor’s Center
Public Interest Research Groups (PIRGS)
Resource Consumption Alliance (conserve trees) 1004
Retired Professionals Action Group
Shafeek Nader Trust for the Community Interest
Tax Reform Research Group
Telecommunications Research and Action Center
No Democrat in Congress and no Democrat running for president has a record of accomplishments that can even come close to this.
By the way, what gives YOU the right to tell other American citizens how to vote? I am astounded that you want to take away OUR right to vote for someone like Nader who actually who represents US. Is disenfranchising American citizens something of which you approve? For “Democrats” you sure sound like Stalinists to me. How about a little tolerance–isn’t that the American way? I guess not.
You know what I’m confused about?
Why on Earth would a girl like me want mikepeters to mail me his testicles? Don’t need `em, don’t want `em!
Wait… He didn’t think I’m a guy and called me she as an intended insult, did he? That’s kinda sexist, isn’t it? I can’t imagine a nice, quiet, reasonable guy like him would be sexist.
You have to admit he’s right about one thing. He is cracking up.
Thank you bildad. Quite a resume for Nader. I went to your website. I bet these Nader hater trolls won’t do that! Or if they do they will have nothing to say about it - I’ve noticed that when their candidates get caught with their pants down, they are suddenly absent on CD.
I remember in 2004, being an Oregon resident, that the Democrats were deliberately fraudulently signing Nader petitions in order to invalidate them. How democratic! I lived on Long Island for 5 long years and it was always Democratic lawn signs being yanked out, and I thought it was Republicans that were undemocratic. Democrats don’t attack Republicans, they attack progressives. Interesting. And some of these Nader haters even call themselves progressives. Not.
I would suggest we ignore mikepeters. He (?) seems unstable.
I would also like to point out that Ralph Nader lives very modestly in a small apartment, without a car, and plows excess earnings back into the organizations he founded or sponsored. He has contributed millions of dollars to theses groups. He doesn’t care about money. He has had a trust fund for years of about $1 million, but that seems more sensible than greedy to me.
He’s an impoverished campaigner since he doesn’t keep his earnings for himself.
Those idiots who scream in caps about his ego don’t know anything about him. I can’t think of any American - short of those who died for their country - who has given as much of their life for this country. And except for the likes of Martin Luther King, Clarence Darrow and Semmelweis, has had so much abuse heaped on him by those who don’t want the boat rocked. Some of you can probably think of some more names on that list. I think people who challenge the establishment will always be vilified in their time, and honored in history. I honor him now. I am grateful that he won’t give up doing the right thing regardless of how he is treated. I admire him for that.
BeForKids; Your last two posts are wonderful, inspiring, and an accurate portrayal of the Democrats and their attack on progressives. I was a life-long Dem, but switched to Green three years ago.
Nader has been right all along, but diehards in any party or ideology refuse to see the scenario.
Ralph’s new book is what I’m giving friends and family for XMas.
Thank you for your thoughts, BeForKids.
“…diehards in any party or ideology refuse to see…”
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/060124_political_decisions.html
nader2000 and mikepeters are the types of people whose egos will never allow them to admit to being wrong (though I counted a number of flimsy and untrue statements in their comments…) They are stuck in their need to be right, so arguing with them is just going to get you out of breath and accomplish nothing.
Well Folks,
It sure seems like old mikepeters has blown the proverbial gasket, so to speak. In all capital letters none the less!!!
And what a mental midget, he does use some BIG WORDS THOUGH!!!!! I better stop before I get edified and vituperated. Oh one more thing mikepeters, do you mean Freud, as in Sigmond? I think it’s spelled FREUD.
Thank you, peaceman. I quit the Democratic party in 1968 to vote Peace and Freedom, came back in ‘72 and found myself holding my nose to vote for McGovern after he dumped Eagleton and that was the very last time I held my nose to vote. I’ve felt good about voting ever since. It’s liberating to vote for who you want. Isn’t it a shame so many are afraid to do that, and because of them, we get this situation? Just think of what we could have if we all voted for who we want instead of who the media tells us we can get? This country feels like it has willingly climbed onto the gallows.
woody, you’re funny! Uh, I think it’s Sigmund.
tweck, I’m not sure what’s going on with the Nader haters, why they are so venomous. Projection? Self-hatred projected outward? Glad I don’t have to live with anyone like that.
“If they don’t close those nuclear reactors down, we’ll have civil war in five years.” Ralph Nader 1977.
“Nader running for president again is an ego centered exersize in futility.” Larry Burnett, Green Party member and former mayor of Sonoma.
“We spent a hundred years trying to clean sweatshops out of our system and what happens? Along come the 1’st major reformer of any impact and he starts doing the same damn thing….My wife had to tell Ralph once to stop phoning her after midnight.” Jim Turner, Former Nader lieutenant.
Gentleman do not be fooled; he owns a million dollars worth of Sisco stock alone, part of an extensive portfolio. He broke up an attempt by his own workers to unionize, holds tax-exmpt thousand dollar a plate fundraisers and conducts/is conducting endless direct mail campaigns seeking tax-free contributions. He has notoriously resisted disclosures of his finances, including regarding the million dollar house his marginally employed brother bought where he is often to be found…
And of course his decision to run in 2000 gave us GWB. Maybe he could put seatbelts on all the dead American servicemen. And Iraqi civilians.
He has hoodwinked many, but not those that know him personally or well. Check your facts. Google Ralph Nader net worth and do some research if you care to.
Yes. Facts. Not profane name calling.
Mr. Nader has reviled corporations as agents of evil, so why in 2000 in financial disclosures to the Federal Election Commission did we learn that Ralph owns two to three million dollars worth of Fidelity Mutual Funds? Owned by the FMR CORPORATION with 1.5 trillion in assets they are the biggest investor in Petro-China whose business for the Khartoum government of Sudan has created significant revenue and been an agent in the deaths of appx. 400,000 people.
And that million dollars worth of Cisco stock? Cisco is a multinational corporation with 35 billion dollars in annual revenue. Exactly what he has defamed, but oh the profits!
His millions of dollars worth of investments in multi-national corporations are clear evidence that his words do not reconcile with his actions. In fact they are diametrically opposed.
What is hypocrisy? Above I have detailed only facts. Any factual repudiation? Were his disclosures to the FEC in 2000 false? They were certainly at shocking odds to the image of austere living he likes to project! He is not just a multi-millionaire, his money his invested in multi-nationals-profit!
Again, any factual repudiation of the facts I have detailed above?
Please refrain from profanity if there is a response to this thread. thank you. a prof.
I only repudiate that his run in 2000 was what gave us Bush. It wasn’t, period. Claiming it was is like blaming all of hurricane Katrina’s damage on a single raincloud. Gore got more votes, despite Republican election fraud, and the Supreme Court shut the count down. If you want to blame Nader that’s because you want to pick on someone in a weaker group (independents/third parties) and identify with a stronger group (Democrats), much as bullies and racists do, probably because you’re scared to face the true extent of the evil in our country and in ourselves. Now I don’t blame anyone for being afraid, but Naderhaterz clearly have an obsession, and as we all know, hate is a great psychological cover for fear.
Granted, I’m sure diehard Naderites can be just as compulsively dishonest as diehard Democrats and diehard Republicans, as described in my link above. But flawed and hypocritical as he is, Nader did not give us Bush. The Republicans did.
So, I am a bully, a racisct, a hater, one who picks on the weak. my hate is likely a psychological cover for my fear, and I have a fear of facing the true extent of evil in our country. How personal.
Lacking any substantive response to the facts I detailed, you insult me as a person. Call me names. This is a projection of your own internal landscape and not germaine to any intelligent dialogue. Can you not refrain?
97,000 votes vs 573 was it? That is called a fact.
Although you could not resist an attack on my character, someone you do not know, and you got your only attempt at a factual determination wrong, you did not become vulgar. Very good.
Polsci,
Ralph freely volunteerd holding stock in Cisco. And the house you speak of is his sister’s. Ralph is a frequent visitor there it’s true, but he lives, as has been posted, in a rooming house. He does not own a car, and all profits from his stocks, etc. go back into his various public interest groups. You can run into Ralph just about any day of the week walking down the street. I won’t say where or when so some Psycho Demopublican doesn’t try to attack him.
What other EGO maniac lives so spartan a life? When he could be living in luxury? So he has some investments, big fucking deal. This is probably the worse thing you can say about Ralph. Can you say the same for Hillary?? Or any of the other sleazy bastards in the demopublican party?
These earth shattering revelations are nothing. I have talked to Ralph many times, on the street, yea, on the street, and he is as down to earth as anyone I have ever met. He is a saint. But all you can find to blast him about is some invesments. WOW!!!!!! That’s really something. You guys are the one’s with blood on your hands, not Ralph!!!! Run Ralph Run!!!!!!
Back in the year 2000, I stood across from Ralph Nader, on national television, looked him right in the eye and said,
That was a great speech, Mr. Nader. You said a lot of things I’ve always wanted to hear a presidential candidate say. There’s just one problem. You’re going to put George W. Bush in the White House.
Nader’s response was worse than disagreeing. It was worse than the ordinary kind of campaign dishonesty. It was pure snake oil salesmanship. He said,
How do you know I won’t win? Just imagine, if you get ten of your friends to support me, and each of them gets ten of theirs…
I lost all respect for the man then and there. I ended up voting for him, because I was in a safe state, and I wanted to send a message to the Democratic Party, but I would rather have punched Nader’s lights out.
That’s exactly the kind of misinterpretation and selective reading should’ve I expected, considering my character assessment. I didn’t say you were a racist, I said Naderhaterz are like racists. And I made no attempt to refute most of your facts, because many of them are correct. Nader is not a saint, despite what others have said. I’ve never said he was. What I am saying is that while 97,000 votes MAY be a fact (election fraud), comparing it to 573 possible votes (election fraud) and making only that comparison is intellectually weak at best, intellectually dishonest at worst–particularly in an election rife with fraud and intimidation. How do we know Diebold didn’t steal 574 votes from Gore and give them to Bush? We don’t, and it’s a very real possibility. (I’ve read that Jimmy Carter refuses to oversee U.S. elections because the system is so corrupt. That may or may not be a fact.) How do we know Diebold didn’t give Nader 574 votes as a decoy? We don’t, and it’s a very real possibility. What we do know is that there was fraud and intimidation, that most people apparently voted for Gore, that about 12% of Democrats may have voted for Bush, that under 3% of voters may have voted for Nader, that the Supreme Court stopped the recount, and that the Democratic leadership didn’t object to that undemocratic decision. Those are also apparent facts, and they should also be considered when one is deciding who to blame everything on. If that is one’s goal. It seems to me systemic corruption is the problem, not that one guy thought running for president would make the Democrats veer to the left.
Perhaps my analysis of the charaters of Naderhaterz is wrong, but my criticism of their obsession and irrational hatred is not. That doesn’t mean I’ll vote for him in 2008 if he runs–I won’t–but I won’t vote for Clinton either.
I stand by everything I’ve written here, without apology.
“How do you know I won’t win? Just imagine, if you get ten of your friends to support me, and each of them gets ten of theirs…”
Sounds like typical politicianspeak b.s. But if he really believed that, he started going around the bend earlier than I thought.
“so he has some investments, so what?” As I detailed above and noone has refuted, he has two plus million dollars worth of Fidelty Mutual Funds, a subsidiary of FMR (according to his FEC filing), they are the largest investor in Petro-China in Khartoum. The revenue flowing to the government has directly helped kill 400,000 people in Darfur.
This has become a well known pr problem for Fidelity, many are divesting, including, I believe, Harvard.
Two questions please: 1. How can one say “so what” to this by a man who has made a career of villifying corporations? (rightly) There are green investments, in solar power companies maybe….
Second question: why are those critical of Nader’s actions and record Naderhaters?
It is not about hate. Except I suppose for those 400,000 people slaughtered with Petro_China money, and thus direct help from Ralph’s millions in Fidelity/FMR stock.
It does not get any clearer than that: the connection to investments in multinationals-FMR-and the responsibility for their rape and genocides, Darfur.
That is “so what”. Almost half a million dead people. How dare anyone say so what to their deaths. How about if they were not African?
What if they were all from New Hampshire?
Why is that so complex?
And to “Woody”, your vulgarity is an insult to Common Dreams.
If you read all the anti-Nader comments above, I think you’ll see that clearly it is sometimes about hate. Maybe not in your or Nader2000’s cases–you’ve mentioned some good reasons to be critical–but those who blame every death in Iraq on him and those who voted for him are irrational.
Ralph Nader is trying to point out that our two party system is corrupt, it does not in any way represent the interests and needs of ordinary Americans. Those who blame Nader for Bush need to look at what’s wrong with our system, and might start with the corporate media, which works hard to distort reality and suppress information that would allow Americans to make rational decisions.
And for Heavens sake, Gore not only caved in like a cold souffle, he went the extra mile, exerting his power of office to prevent any investigation of the theft of Florida. WHY? Why don’t you blame him? He gave Florida away. And now he’s resurrecting himself.
Why is it no matter what people like Hillary, Pelosi and Gore do, no matter how often they betray us, they get forgiven over and over. Some nut on another thread claims that wonderful lady Nancy is doing her hardest to end the war. Well, Nancy, ever heard of the power of the purse? Didn’t think so.
I would like to see Ralph divest himself of stocks that are used to hurt others. I hope he does. I went to the website so critical of him, and saw that anyone can twist information any way they want. I’m not saying he’s flawless. But no one is. And who do you know who can match his track record for his accomplishments - on our behalf? Not one politician out there (except Dennis) cares as much about us as he does.
By the way, he said he would run if Hillary gets the nomination. he didn’t say that about anyone else. Tells me something. And even if the primaries don’t give it to her, the 800 party hack super delegates could do it. Some democracy! Even the Republicans don’t have 800 super delegates. Why even bother having primaries?
Gail Collins should see “An Unreasonable Man,” a film biography of Ralph Nader that will air on PBS stations all over the country from Dec. 18 to 24 (check your local listings) on the PBS series “Independent Lens.” The film features numerous eye-opening scenes, such as the one at the first Gore-Bush debate in October 2000 where Nader was threatened with arrest by a Massachusetts state trooper and a staffer for the Debate Commission (a consortium of corporations such as Sun Microsystems and Anheiser-Busch, allied with the Democratic and Republic National Committees). He had a ticket and an invitation from Fox News to give on-air commentary about the debate, but he was thrown off the grounds by the debate’s sponsors. That’s right: a candidate for President with polling support of millions of voters, here in the “land of the free” was treated like a criminal and would have been arrested if he hadn’t left. Reading about this incident should make anyone who believes in democracy and political liberty angry. But this description doesn’t do it justice: you have to see it to believe it.——-A look at “An Unreasonable Man” (or a visit to “DraftNader.org,” a website set up by Nader supporters who want to see him run for President again in 2008) will give the country a chance to re-evaluate Nader and his value to our democracy. The film allows some of Nader’s harshest critics, as well as admirers and those who are ambivalent about his life and his politics, to have their say.——–I’m an avowed admirer of Nader’s; I was in 2000 and I still am. But there are millions of people out there who’ve bought in to the same anti-democratic attitude that Collins buys into when she dismisses Mike Gravel, the candidate who hasn’t raised a million bucks, so he’s not newsworthy. People who call themselves progressives or populists owe it to themselves to check out this film and ask themselves where their sympathies lie–with the corporate-sponsored Debate Commission, with dismissive elitist journalists like Collins, with spiteful academics and professional progressives who belive the American people don’t deserve more than two choices, even if those choices are two major parties that are bought and paid for by the same Big Money corporations…or with a great hero of American democracy.
JerryKann; Good posting. I saw part of “AN Unreasonable Man” several months ago. It was well done. I’m glad their gonna air it this week. You are so right about the “undemocratic” Debate Commission.
Ephraim Said:
“Nader said some time back that if Hillary gets the nomination he’ll run again as independent.”
I hope you are right Ephraim! Ralph Nader may not be a gavanizing speaker either, but at least he would give us an honest choice again.
Ralph, if you run, I will bother to show up and vote!
Run Ralph, RUN!
So Ralph had an invitation from “Fox News” to do commentary for them.
Some people, Noam Chomsky for instance, would probably defer on that one because of Principle-Fox News is well recognized as the lowest news voice, and voice of the right, on “tv”, a proponent of war, big money and multinational corporations and their interests. Why would Ralph have anything to do with them? Oh yes, commentators are paid, well paid w/ Murdoch money. So co-opted. And why would Murdoch want Ralph there? Let’s see. Murdoch is a right wing fascist, he was goint to pay Ralph to “comment,(critisize)” the candidates, Ralph was eager to…and the effect would have been? Oh yes, to strengthen the position of the Republican-fascists.
Can anyone tell me, 1. If he has divested his 2-3 million dollars worth of Fidelity/FMR stock. (Petro-China-Darfur)
Or 2. Why his working for Fox News (a true agent of evil) as a paid commentator, or attempt to, is “okay” ????? Personally, I feel any legitimating of Fox News is one for the bad guys. But money is money.
I appreciate his supporters motivating me to learn more about Ralph.
And respect the restraint of the recent threads.
Vulgar Polsci? I’ll tell you what’s vulgar, Hillary Clinton’s warmongering is vulgar. Nader 2000 wanting to punch Ralph’s lights out. Demopublicans villifying someone’s right to run for political office. These sleazy, spineless demopubs who insist that anyone to the left of Genghis Khan must vote for their candidate!!!! Now that’s VULGAR!!!! Talk about arrogant. Has any one of you demopubs read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights? Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of these spineless poor excuses for invertebrates in the demopub party complicit in EVERY SINGLE one of Bush’s disgraceful, fascist policies. Patriot Act, The Iraq Slaughter, Bankruptcy bill, etc. etc. and on and on ad nauseum…..but all you can talk about is this idiotic and Stalinistic fantasy that everyone who doesn’t vote republicrat, must vote for your candidate!!!!
NOW THAT IS VULGAR!!!!!
What we have is not a two party system, but a One Party system. Even now that the Dems have the house and the Senate and what happens? Nothing!!! Nothing, business as usual. Crime after crime of Bush Cheney et al. and Nancy Pelosi takes impeachment off the table before she’s sworn in as speaker!!!!!! Yea, there’s a real big difference between the Republicrats and the Demopublicans, one of them starts with a D and the other starts with an R!!!
Well, you just wait until Hillary wins the presidency, then they’ll really show them….When she increases the defence budget by a couple of Trillion, and she picks up where Bill left off by sending millions more poor and people of color into yet deeper poverty. By loosening more and more of the environmental rules on her friends in the various and sundry industries who butter her bread. That, my friend, is VULGAR, but Ralph is the problem!!!! UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!
Take a look at this link if you haven’t already, woody.
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/060124_political_decisions.html
If Hillary is elected, partisan Democrats won’t even notice her crimes or will excuse and make justifications for them, just as partisan Republicans don’t notice, excuse and justify Bush’s crimes, and even his completely un(traditionally)conservative spending habits and growth of government. That’s how the two party system maintains stability (i.e. prevents change).
JerryKann December 17th, 2007 1:23 am
Gail Collins should see “An Unreasonable Man,” a film biography of Ralph Nader that will air on PBS stations all over the country from Dec. 18 to 24 (check your local listings) on the PBS series “Independent Lens.”
…………..
I checked my local listings and was NOT surprised…
Tues 18th-12:00 AM
Wed 19th-03:00 AM
Sun 23rd-03:00 AM
Seem strange? What’s with that??
THAT’S WHAT THEY DO !
Nader must be some threat to go to all that trouble that they do to stifle any message he sends. Vote Nader 2008…
.
Dear CD gang,
Haven’t you noticed? Where’s Commander ‘n’ Chimp???? Wanna bet Mr. Peters is a reincarnation?
Dear Mr. Peters (C’n'C),
Thanks for taking my advice and changing your name. Nobody was listening anymore. Nice try coming back with the same rhetoric stoked in hyperbole and trying to disguise it in caps. Not working though. Try again. You’re the quintessential NaderHater. You’d make a great clansman. You’ve enough hate in you to fill a RNC.
A wanna be paid Fox News Pundit? Investments in FMR/Petro-China-Darfur?
Busting up an attempt by his own underpaid staffers to unionize?
These are three lucid questions I raised courteously. I have seen not one word in answer to these questions.
Only more attacks on each other’s character. The use of the word hate a lot.
Can any Nader supporter address those questions? Or are they not defensible?
If any response could be devoid of personal attacks(see above), that would be appreciated and respected.
I challenge any Nader Supporter to refute the questions I raised about Ralph.
Because so far, no one has. Every fact based question I’ve raised has been ignored or dismissed with a “so what” response.
Your silence on these questions is the answer to them.
Your silence on these questions speaks volulmes. I’ve been sharing this thread with a class. Once ambivalent, most of us have come to radically disprespect Ralph Nader for his hypocrisy based upon the above facts. We thank you, ‘08 comes.
Again, I CHALLENGE any nader supporter to address these questions with factual responses. We find the hateful invective entertaining, but not illuminating.
PS: Is the CD readership really a “gang?” This thread sounds like one and you are now self-described as such.
How about a fact-based and intelligent to response my questions? I CHALLENGE anyone. After 2-3 days, no one!
Oh yes, some luminary responded with “so what.”
polsci,
For starters, provide evidence for your claims rather than clang about in a bell tower. It couldn’t be more simple.
I did. Maybe you missed it above. Ralph declared on his FEC filing in 2000, (that is Federal Election Commission ruthru) that he held the investments I’ve detailed above, (detailed more than once, factually).
It was you Nader supporters that brought to my attention Ralph’s denied desire to Pundit for Fox. I point out the sickening nature of that and only silence. You (his supporters) brought it up. Anyone want to speak up for your man wanting to be a paid Fox commentator? Where are you?
If you don’t consider his FEC filing-Fidelity-FMR-Darfur-to have evidentiary value, or have any other single fact to refute my questions, accuse me of “clanging in a bell tower” A simple character attack.
So my CHALLENGE goes unanswered. Just another personal insult.
Oh yes. I reread your last post ruthru, hateful invective. And irrellivant.
So there you are ruthru! Facts. Matters of public record. Unlike you I will not become insulting, but this is simple. Very Very Simple.
Ralph Nader “Kids are over medicated, militarized, cosmetized, corporatized. They are raised by Kindercare, fed by McDonalds.”
True. And here is another fact re rn, that is fact, not insult: At the time he made the above statement he had hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in a fund, (not Fidelity Magellan, that is another one with significant holdings in Halliburton, Raytheon, General Dynamics and FMR that Ralph is invested in) which held 15,694,800 shares of McDonalds stock! Could someone please tell me why that is not hypocritical?
Those are very specific facts. He villifed McDonalds while simultaneously having hundreds of thousands invested in a fund holding almost 17 million shares of McDonalds stock.
He is or was heavily invested in Fidelity Magellan and thus the comapanies listed above (Raytheon makes missile systems ruthru-is that simple? It is a fact! General Dynamics makes jets and bombs and laser guidance systems and more missiles! More specific fact. So rn’s villifying corporations while at the same time being invested in these, the very worst of them. Fact.
I again challenge anyone to refute any fact I have delineated. So far no takers huh?
But I’ll bet this, devoid of a factual rebuttal (going on a few days now!) My character or person will be attacked.
You’d win that bet, because you have the facts on your side but right now you aren’t showing much character.
I won two bets.
1. My facts would not be refuted.
2. I would be denigrated as a person in the face of this. “you aren’t showing much character”
Thank You. I’m not a Catholic Priest, Elected Official or Law Enforcement Officer, but I do the best I can.
Actually, you’re doing better than many priests, politicians and police officers. But you may want to issue your challange at Nader’s latest column (http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/12/18/5882/) where your audience isn’t one lone loser (and that’s not a reference to you). This thread is almost dead–you might as well be talking to yourself, and that won’t be much of a victory.
Good morning Barely Human, wanted to note that although we see RN very differently, I believe all who’ve been part of this thread, to a one, have quite similar political perspectives: disgust w/ the system, a knowledge that the entire political machine, both parties, serves the filthy interests of the corporate elite/military industrial/wall street few.
I am so far left of center I think I might fall off the planet, I want to sometimes.
So, this issue aside, I think we all probably see many things alike.
Best Wished. Merry Wednesday and a Happy New Thursday!
Polsci,
While you are INDOCTRINATING your class to be good followers of the corporate way, why don’t you, at the very least, be a little tiny bit, objective. Your hypocrisy is just what I’d expect from a true Demopublican. You go on and on about people attacking your character, and in the very nex