‘My Number One Priority Is to Protect You’
Like other families, the Bush family eats, uses medicines, and relies on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to assure the safety of vast amounts of both products.
Like other families, more and more of the food and medicine you consume is coming from other countries where the FDA has very little inspection authority. Nearly 80 percent of active pharmaceutical ingredients are imported from foreign countries.
Hardly a day goes by without a news story recounting or disclosing casualties or serious perils from contaminated food and medicines. Many of these and other medicines have seriously harmful side-effects or lack of efficacy.
President Bush is the leading authority in the country when it comes to making FDA an adequately funded, staffed, and empowered agency to urgently fulfill what he says repeatedly is his top priority-to protect the safety of the American people.
So how is the FDA doing under his watch? A troubled agency for decades, politically undermined and deficient in budgets, the FDA is now more burdened and besieged than ever. Its budget last year was $ 2 billion - the price ten years ago of one B-2 bomber. Here are the FDA’s own words:
“More than 250 different foodborne illnesses are food safety threats. Based on Centers for Disease Control estimates, 76 million Americans become sick, more than 300,000 are hospitalized and 5,000 die each year from foodborne illnesses. Recent outbreaks highlight the need for increased resources to strengthen food safety….”
The FDA’s other major responsibility is to “approve safe and effective drugs and medical products in a timely way and ensure that medical products remain safe.”
In recent months, there have been many drugs implicated in preventable heart attacks (Vioxx); one thousand lives lost each month (Trasylol); increased risk of heart attacks (Avandia); hundreds of adverse effects, 4 fatalities so far (heparin from a Chinese factory that the FDA did not inspect. It confused its name with another factory.)
The flood of essentially unregulated, uninspected products from China keeps making headlines. Polluted seafood from fish farms, defective tires, lead-painted toys, poisoned pet food, ingredients in products that appear to be, but are not, made or raised in the USA. Country of origin labels are often not required.
What is called “free trade” with China is really corporate managed trade that ships factories and jobs to China, or contracts with Chinese firms that operated in a Wild West atmosphere. The products are then exported to the United States along with all the hazards and defects allowed by this communist dictatorship.
President Bush is not only doing nothing about a huge trade imbalance with China resulting in huge borrowings from China; he is also allowing the products of corrupt corporatism in China to send products that flow into the bodies of American consumers, American patients and American children.
As the New York Times wrote: “Instead of strengthening the government’s regulatory systems, the Bush administration has spent years cutting budgets and filling top jobs with industry favorites. The evidence of their failures keep mounting…”
Similarly over at the Department of Agriculture, meat and poultry inspectors, authorized by laws we helped pass starting in the late Sixties, are, by and large, not backed up by their superiors. Instead, they are reprimanded or reassigned when they stand firm to protect the food supply against politically-connected companies.
The FDA still, decades after its founding, does not have subpoena power. Its food inspection system, especially for imports, is pathetic. Both the FDA and the Department of Agriculture need stronger law enforcement and mandatory recall power with full White House backing.
In his eighth year of office, President Bush has not been a leader of the country toward comprehensive legislation that would no longer leave Americans defenseless in the markets of food and drugs. When just one drug takes 1000 American lives a month (see CBS 60 Minutes, February 17, 2008), you better believe this is a national security matter that President Bush should pay focused attention to, even if no suspected terrorists are involved.
However, his ideology is one of no-law-and-order, no regulation, that is, of these corporate outlaws and their profiteering, reckless practices. President Bush and his Party’s campaign chests are filled by these very corporate interests.
As a result, the FDA shakes from one crisis after another, from one blunder after another, from one missed opportunity for prevention after another.
Yet, he still says that his top priority is “maintaining a culture of life,” and that “my number one priority is to protect you.”
President Bush owes the American people, in a major national address, an explanation and very soon.
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions.
I can’t wait for tomorrow, on “Meet The Press”, when you will announce you are running for President, Mr. Nader. That will be a great day for this country and for people around the world.
Give them hell Ralph!!!!
Ralph Nader and the Green Party stood up to protect us in 2000, but was shot down due to the corporatocracy running this country. Hopefully he’ll stand up again this year.
I’m equally excited to see what party banner Ralph will be under, AND who his VP will be.
As I’ve made very clear, I am still pushing for a
Gravel/Nader
Nader/Gravel
Independent powerhouse ticket. Wouldn’t you agree?
http://www.petitiononline.com/granad08/petition.html
Of course. What do you expect from the Bush Admin, and any other politicians? They take care of their own and do not give a s**t about anyone else. Yes we should hold ALL of them accountable and make them suffer just like the people they dissed. But that is a pipe dream.
.
I’ll say it again…
http://www.ontheissues.org/ Ralph…Ralph_Nader.htm
We needed Ralph Nader as President in 2000.
We needed Ralph Nader as President in 2004.
We NEED Ralph Nader as President in 2008.
Never before as we do now.
.
I think it will be more helpful for Nader to use his power (and he has tons of it… just ask the Dems, who still blame him for losing the White House!) to cut a deal with Obama. Have Obama agree to some progressive initiatives or else risk being cut off at the knees by another Nader run…
Nader could do this every 4 years and make some serious progress.
We would not have two of the ultra right-wing Supreme Court justices we now have & we wouldn’t be in Iraq right now if Gore were president. Mr. Nader’s insistence in 2000 that there was little or no difference between Republicans and Democrats was not exactly true. Sure the differences between the parties may be small, but that doesn’t mean they are insignificant. And in the 2000 race the significance couldn’t have been greater. This was a colossal misjudgment of the Bill Crystal variety. Heck of a job, Ralph!
Ralph is so right about so much,but running for president is a lousy tactic,much as you Naborites want him to.You hang on to your naive purity at ALL our peril and I say to Hell with you!The Democratic Party is filled with worms,I will agree. But compared with the Republicans,I can live a bit longer with their “impurities”The election of John McCain is a cetainly a vote toward fascism and progressives and liberals continuing to be marginalized. Obama does invoke the “power” and “will” of The People. Ralph might have good points,but his ego,is bigger than his prospects.Dig?I am sure there might be a Cabinet post that he might be an asset,in. But this quixotic quest to be president is getting b-o-r-i-n-g,especially with the stakes involved!
Amen!just saying!Sometimes “purity” is a mental illness!
Ralph we need you more than ever.
Nader should be appointed head of the FDA or other similar agency. He will do the hard work necessary to protect us, as he has been doing for 40 years.
I agree,hamster. I just wish that he would quite running for president!!!Obama could use a good man like Ralph,in such a position!
If Ralph Nader cared as much about the FDA as he claims,
he would have helped Al Gore to run a better one in 2000, or John Kerry to run a better one in 2004, or Barack Obama to get and run a better one now.
All his ridiculous “candidacy” means is that real liberals have to work harder than ever to overcome both McCain and the wasted vote margin of misled “Greenies” (or whatever this time) running off to “join the circus” again.
Thankfully, the Obama momentum may be large enough to accomplish this, but other than to accomodate a single ego on steroids, why should we have to? Helping conservatives get an edge and a leg-up every four years is not patriotism and it’s not “consumerism” either.
It’s an empty “ism” chained onto us like a pile of concrete blocks.
Well said,Daniel!
In 2004, when Nader ran as an independent, most reports from exit polls show half or more of the people who voted for him would have picked Bush rather than Kerry as their second choice. Regardless of the spoiler effect, I think people should welcome the campaign of anyone who would like to run for political office. After all, that is what democracy with a small “d” means.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/02/22/nader-on-meet-the-press-sunday-morning-feb-24/#comments
tommybones:
“cutting a deal” isn’t necessary. EVEN THOUGH that’s what Nader basically offered in both 2000 and 2004, when he presented key issues to Gore and Kerry to emphasize for the victory. Think they listened? Stuff like real healthcare? Nader’s cut no one off at the knees; they do that to themselves. But pushing more progressive agendas would help Obama, since he’s a completely token progressive, totally in name only.
———————–
Daniel David:
Damn, dude, why are you such a little pissant? You’re the type of guy I would spill my drink on at a bar and have no remorse, you’re that dumb and off-base.
Your small-minded, immature understanding of Nader’s rationale for running is exactly what’s wrong with many “liberals.” Let’s point the finger!! Let’s *never* recognize any faults or limitations on our own part!!
Nader brought votes to Gore in 2000 by pushing him left. Therefore, I don’t see how you’ll have to be working “harder” to defeat McCain.
It’s so very un-Obama of you to attack Nader and criticize his “ego.” Shouldn’t you be preaching the same porridge-like unity and understanding that your leader projects?
Again, start Nader-bashing, and you’re gonna get slapped you upside the head. Instead of whining, maybe you can get the jump on Obama to actually listen to some of Nader’s suggestions, unlike Gore or Kerry.
dancingfool “especially with the stakes involved!”
What stakes? Continue the current system rapidly (McClain) or continue the current system slowly (Obama or Hillary.) You knuckle dragging democrats missed the best human running (Dennis Kucinich) because you listened to the damn MSM. You actually bought the “He doesn’t look presidential enough” or “He isn’t electable” nonsense the MSM fed you. Now you want us liberal/progressive/independent voters to lower our standards of leadership and make the same mistake. Not me, if Ralph runs he gets my vote I will not lower myself to your standards.
If McClain, Obama or Hillary gets the presidency the only ones to blame are people with more air between their ears than brains.
I hope Ralph can find a way to support Obama. I believe he will.
I’m not religious, or especially given to Biblical imagery. The biblical scenario explicated below is not meant to endorse the actual scriptural tale, with its embedded sexism, etc. It’s just a way to frame a perspective.
That said, this year I’ve become increasingly mordantly amused by the term “purity” so freely banded about by excruciatingly shallow, orthodox, conventionally pious would-be “pragmatists” or “realists”. To borrow a obsolescent phrase from the late, great Vonnegut, it’s as if they drive by staring fixedly at the hood ornament on their car.
I’m not much troubled by their Through the Looking-Glass view of “purity”, which stands morality on its head and implicitly argues that there is a higher morality in abandoning principle and conscience in order to more freely engage in the amoral and spiritually toxic temporal power game of contemporary politics. This is clearly a self-serving and self-sealing perspective, including disparaging and castigating those who dissent as a matter of conscience or integrity by condemning these attributes as a woefully ignorant, immature, or malign form of selfishness that betrays a greater good.
The Biblical image referred to above? I view the ubiquitous and typically admonitory condemnation of so-called “purity” as a rhetorical shuck, or canard, evocative of the arguments Eve might have used against Adam after taking that fatal bite of the apple.
Like the orthodox lesser-evilist Democratic apologists, Eve would have been conscious, to a greater or lesser extent, that she’d gone out on a limb by yielding to the temptation of immeasurable knowledge and power in exchange for abandoning the “purity” of the dictates of her conscience. Naturally, the first thing she would seek to do– as Adam would have, if he’d have been the one to take the first bite– is to absolutely insist that her decision was the smart thing to do under the circumstances, but that her accomplishment would not be complete without widespread support.
Perhaps Eve would actually believe that her stance was righteous and an improvement over her “pure” state, and thus urge others to follow her path in good faith. Perhaps this is a consequence of becoming persuaded by the serpentine Deceiver that purity has no place in a utopia.
I admire Ralph Nader because he participates as a kind of conscientious objector to the political status quo. It may be that Nader has character and personality flaws, but the caricature of Nader as merely an egomanical, narcissistic Trickster is belied by the wisdom and wholesomeness of his political views.
It may be that the proud Impurists are destined to prevail in this Vale of Tears, but I’m not likely to feel remiss or derelict in rejecting their hollow and bankrupt repudiation of the sacredness of individual conscience by pejoratively branding it “purity”.
I was born at night, but it wasn’t last night.
OMG — is Ralph going to run again? This is madness! The fate of the planet hangs in the balance in this election; what will a President McCain will do about global warming? And how long will McCain keep our troops in Iraq? THINK, Ralph, THINK!
It breaks my heart that one of my all-time heroes, who used to claim he would NOT run for office because he was more effective outside the Beltway, is letting his frustration get the better of him AGAIN. The only protest I can think to make is to stop donating to NYPIRG; but that’s kinda like shooting myself in the foot. DAMNnnnnn!
i’m wiith luthervan above. i think nader can find a way to support obama or help him on issues. maybe a real dream ticket is something of obama/ nader?? i would vote for that twice.
I am not sure Nader would be an asset to Obama’s ticket. Obama has made inroads with the conservatives that in other times would be the meat of McCain’s bid for President and they wont stand to see Nader as V.P. What I think Ralph should do is use his power to negotiate a position in Obama’s cabinet such as Secretary of Agriculture, with a substantial budget and subpoena power.
Little Brother,why I can’t agree with you on your premises,I do admire your moral stand.In my deepest self,I agree with much of what you say,but have lived in this old world long enough to see such fragile flowers crushed with impunity. If we can get the best for the world,can we start with “pretty good”?
true and good point
I can’t remember: did Nader run in ‘96? 92? 88? I guess he didn’t feel the same urgency then as now.
THE DREAM TEAM:
OBAMA- president
EDWARDS- VP or attorney general
NADER- Sec of Energy, Interior, Agriculture (oversee the FDA!!), or Commerce
HILLARY- attorney general, or Sec of Defense, or Health
WESLEY CLARK- Sec of Defense, or State
HAGEL- Sec of Defense
RICHARDSON- Sec of State
KUCINICH- Sec of Labor, or Commerce
DODD- attorney general
OPRAH WINFREY - UN ambassador
FEINGOLD- what post have I left out?
GORE- Sec of Energy, or Interior
Press secretary: Ted Koppel, Keith Olbermann, Thom Hartmann, Carville, Bill Moyers, or others from the non-entertainment old school of journalism…the job would obviously be easier because it would consist mostly of telling the truth!
Care to make any other suggestions? I know there are other progressives than the the ones I’ve listed. This White House has a stench of so many criminals in the cabinet that it will take a few years to get rid of it!
I hope the fervent Obama-Dems, who are so excited about reaching across the aisle to conservatives, can drop their irrational hatred of Ralph Nader and reach across to him. What that means is that his issues–fighting the corporatocracy that is destroying our economy (and apparently now, sometimes our lives)–will become the Dems issues, for real. Not just lip service during campaign season.
I know this is unlikely, but I have a dream….
A peaceful response to “Peace Czar”
I don’t hang around in bars waiting for accident-prone drunks to “spill their drink (on me) without remorse”.
As for your notion that Obama is a fake progressive, I don’t buy it and neither do millions of voters now hoping to get him elected. As for your suggestion that Obama will be more gracious and statesmanlike than I am when speaking of Ralph Nader’s candidacy, you’re quite right. He will be. His diplomatic skill far exceeds mine—and yours.
dancingfool et all -
You are not bored by the vapid, rhetorical nonsense of yet another campaign season? I’ve been listening to this dog and pony show every four years since Dewey/Truman, and I’m so weary of it I could puke.
The real villain, the corporate oligarchy, secures its hold on power every election year by means of the two-party system and our predictable eleventh hour willingness to vote for the lesser of evils. That is what is getting boring for me. A viable third party in opposition to the interests of big capital would begin to create a political dynamic which is not necessarily win-win for big pharma, big oil, et al. They count on a panicy, short sighted electorate, and they are never disappointed. Ralph doesn’t expect to become president. He wants to create a power structure that represents the people, and this is a longer term project than our perennial quick fix mentality seems capable of grasping.
It is not a question of purity. It is a question of whether you are not finally convinced that the democrats are shills for the same destructive interests as the repubs, and that the two parties are nothing more than two different ways of fooling the public into going to the same place.
The beast runs on oil, and believe me we’ll be stealing somebody’s oil no matter who sits on that fake throne in Washington. They accommodate liberal discontent the same way republican conventions handle protests by sticking us in free speech zones. Voting democrat is nothing but standing in the designated progressive zone. I don’t know what will become of the world in the near term, but you and I will not have a say in it until we are able at the very least to refuse the blue pill and wake up.
Wasn’t one of the reasons for not allowing drugs to be purchased from Canada based on the fact that we couldn’t be sure of the quality of foreign drugs. Now we learn that our drugs are being manufactured in China. How come no one in Congress points out the discrepancy between these two facts?
pavroviandog
If you took Oprah Winfrey out that line-up would do very nicely from the choices available! Maybe add a Department of Peace as a second job for Dennis Kucinich
rickster: you said
“You knuckle dragging democrats missed the best human running (Dennis Kucinich) because you listened to the damn MSM.”
Count me out of that please - I did NOT listen to the MSM and I’m still not listening. But what can anyone do now - the vast majority in the USA seem to want Obama. I just hope he doesn’t let ‘em down with a big bump when he gets the keys to the White House.
Do we know Mr Nader will run? He might just endorse Obama. Seems a bit late to be jumping in when the game’s all but over.
A summary of the eight years of the last Democratic presidential administration:
A. CLINTON/GORE/KERRY WAR CRIME HIGHLIGHTS:
1. Clinton/Gore started the Iraq war through their their bombing and sanctions which killed up to a million Iraqis, many of them children. Clinton’s Secretary of state simply said “it was worth it”. Bush has probably only recently surpassed Clinton with regard to Iraqi murders on his soul.
2. Clinton and his loyal democrat General Clark also pioneered the modern concept of imperialist war based on lies, dissembling PR, and phony pretexts, in Yugoslavia - there was NO basis to the accusations of “ethnic cleansing” of Albanians. Through the NATO occupation, Albanians have forcibly driven Serbians out of their own cultural heartland - blowing up and burning about 80 churches, monasteries and other Serbian Orthodox cultural sites dating back to the 1300’s.
3. As commander of a “swift boat” in the Mekong Delta, Kerry murdered numerous unarmed civilians. He has never apologized for it.
B. ECONOMY
Our current economic woes on the working class have very little to do with anything Bush did (because he didn’t do anything) they have everything to do with the neoliberal-capitalist, so-called “free trade” policies vigorously led by Clinton/Gore.
2. While he provided modest increased to minimum wage, they were inadequate to regain the losses of the Reagan/Bush years.
3. Unions continued to hemorrhage from vicious corporate union-busting. Clinton did nothing - except render ineffective, and later, hound out of office, the only truly progressive cabinet member in the Clinton administration - Labor Secretary Robert Reich.
4. Other progressive fired by Clinton inlcuded asst. the racist firing of Asst. Atty. General Lani Guinier.
5. Kerry proposed no changes to these policies during his presidential campaign.
C. HEALTHCARE
1. After Hillary’s ridiculous health care plan - really a givaway to the the big insurance interests - was shot down the Clinton Administration did…nothing.
2. Nothing, that is, except the sexual reactionary (and probably racist) firing of Surgeon General Joycelin Elders.
4. ENVIRONMENT
1. After an initial proposal for a modest. broad-based carbon tax was shot down, Gore turned 180 degrees and went on to work tirelessly to sabotage the Kyoto agreement and render it useless.
2. In the face of the explosion of obscene SUV manufacturing, Clinton never proposed any increase in the CAFE standards, nor any other simple administrative measures, (like no longer defining SUV’s as trucks) that would have kept them from being exempt from the automobile fuel economy standards.
3. No significant new environmental regulations were passed over the eight years of Clinton-Gore and existing regularions underwent major interpretative changes in favor of big industry.
4. Most notably, through a slippery Clinton interpretation of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The incredibly destructive mining practice of mountain-top removal became widespread through the southern Appalachians - which harbored the most diverse forest ecosystems to be found in any temperate zone on earth.
Now, why should I trust a Democrat?
Daniel David,
Thanks for a response, albeit a cowardly non-response. Insults aside, did you respond to any of the points I brought up?
Millions and millions of “progressives” who think they’re voting for a “progressive” in Obama should check his voting record and his platforms. Care to address that? Maybe you and your millions should actually challenge Obama here and there. The notion of progressive has been in the cellar and chipped away at for so long, but that still doesn’t make a moderate like Obama any semblance of one.
Here, let’s make it simple. PROVE IT by listing the issues upon which Obama should be considered “progressive.”
You really served me with your calm dismissals. And Obama communicating with Nader doesn’t just mean some pontificating appeasements… Nader knows what Obama isn’t saying, and won’t take a non-answer as an answer. Apparently, you’re perfecly content with that.
The weakest people are those not even willing to have a spirited discussion and hash something out. That’s what I feel most times I read your posts. Please engage in a real dialogue, diplomacy or not.
you wanna protect me ralph ???
help me elect DEMOCRATS to the US Senate so we can restore the judiciary
help me elect A DEMOCRAT to be President, so he can appoint a DEMOCRAT to be Attorney General, and end the POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS BY THE REPUGLITARDS in the doj
Help me elect DEMOCRATS to Congress, so we can impeach george bush and try him for WAR CRIMES
can you help me out with that ralph ???
or is this all about YOU ???
thought so, you piece of shit !!!
are the repuglitards gonna bankroll you again ralph ???
Obama just refused to blame Nader for “spoiling” the 2000 election.
Here we go again. Ralphy got his check from Rove, so he’s gonna announce, or attack the democrats in some manner….my enemy’s friend is my enemy.
Talk about a snake-oil salesman. Step right up suckers.
Hey Ralphy-how is your General Dynamics/Raytheon stock?
Peace Czar,
After being called all sorts of things in your first and second posts, do you really think I want to hang and “hash things out” with you? (Think hard, now.)
As for Obama, he is the best you can possibly get this election cycle. We’re to that point. It’s him or Clinton or McCain. You don’t get Nader–whether he runs or not. (Because he has just as good of chance of being elected while running as if he never even announces—zero.) You only get side effects of his candidacy, and those run in the range from benignly useless to outright risky. There isn’t anything else to “hash”, and I don’t have to defend Obama to you. He is what he is–as good as there is to be had this time.
The Dems might be winning. Must be time to trot out Ralph again.
Obama is no progressive– which is why the corporate money is rolling in to support him. He’s bought and paid for, just like Clinton.
The reason Democrats hate Ralph so much is that he actually has principles and stands by them– which serves to expose the hypocrisy of the Democrats.
Their so-called “pragmatism” is nothing but cowardice and greed.
Go Ralph!
Daniel David__Hang in there and don`t let the peace czar get you ruffled. He is really the war czar and is only trying to cause as much trouble as possible.
Anyone that cannot see that our only hope to turn things around is to elect either Democrat this time has blinders on and is not dealing with reality.
Ralph, you are a good man, but please stay where you are and work behind the scene, and do not mess up another election, as this is a big one for all of us. Our country is in grave danger from our own leaders and their cronies.
“The weakest people are those not even willing to have a spirited discussion and hash something out. That’s what I feel most times I read your posts. Please engage in a real dialogue, diplomacy or not.”
You’re not going to get that from Daniel David, peace czar. He’s a billboard for the Democratic Party, albeit a sophomoric one. He’s done more harm to his cause than he will ever know.
The HYPOCRITE lambasts Chinese firms doing business “in a wild west atmosphere”
Well, RALPH NADER is heavily invested in Fidelity Mutual which was A PRIMARY INVESTOR in PETRO-CHINA in the Sudan, where it played a direct, wild-west role in the GENOCIDE in Darfur-with the help of Ralph’s money.
Only public embarrasment forced 91% divestiture in 2007.
But not divestiture of Raytheon, General Dynamics, McDonalds or many other corporations he whines about-but is STILL INVESTED IN.
His last FEC filing disclosed his investment in Petro-China et al…via Fidelity-Mutual-but hey, PROFIT!!!!
And for NaderLovers, Up is Down.
People INVESTED IN MISSILE SYSTEMS who talk about PRODUCT SAFETY are hypocrites and much much worse, (MURDERERS).
mikepeters,
Proof, please.
What crap!Ralphy to the rescue,NOT!You who whine about the two party system. What the hell do you propose,while our country sinks to the bottom!
Hello iammyself, if you Google ‘nader investments fidelity’
the first several sites all detail Nader’s relationship with Fidelity Magellan, the huge mutual fund which owns large blocs of Cisco, Raytheon, G-dynamics and more of that ilk.
His investments came to light in his own required FEC filing and worst of all was Ralph’s money helping fuel the genocide in Darfur via Fidelity Magellan/PetroChina.
The proof is documented backwards and forwards and up and down at the above mentioned web-sites, takes maybe ten fifteen minutes at most to assimilate.
Thanks for a po-lite inquiry, mike.
What the hell do you propose,while our country sinks to the bottom!
As a true progressive I’m going to do the only thing I can do. Let the country sink. As far as I can tell that’s what the average democrat and republican wants. Otherwise none of the people left in the race would even be in there.
mikepeters: Do you have any sources for your claims? Perhaps a website where voters can determine for themselves??
Here’s what I think about Nader:
He is way to progressive for the majority of americans and he has a poor image due to his 2000 “spoil”, whether this image is deserved or not (for the record, I don’t think it is). Therefore, we all know he will never be elected this time around, especially with Obama’s strong support. However, Obama is definitely not a progressive by any means and is more neo-con than liberal on many of his stances. I think Ralph should run, but he should say, when he makes his announcement speech, that he will promise to drop out before November if Obama agrees to the following:
1. Obama runs using public financing as he promised months ago (but is now backing away from his statements).
2. Obama has to support IRV or another type of voting reform measure that would allow for third party candidates to run in the future without “spoiling” elections.
3. Obama has to explain in detail why spending more money to increase our military and defense spending is economically and morally wise.
4. Why impeaching Bush/Cheney is not (or is) a good option.
5. And Obama would have to somehow prove he is harsher on corporations and corporate welfare.
Finally, Obama has to promise he pledges his full support for Nader to be included in ALL the debates and forums up through whenever ralph drops out.
Maybe this is too much or too little, but Nader has to make Obama pledge on some of these critical issues. Also, if in November, Obama somehow has a monster lead, Nader should stay in just to see how much of the vote he actually gets - He has mine!!
Kernel,
Very politely now, piss off. Very courageous of you. The only trouble I’m trying to cause is a legitimate conversation. DD is apparently too huffy to engage; he feels slighted
—
Daniel David,
Just as you won’t acknowledge anything I say as of merit, you totally and utterly discredit yourself by not answering a damn thing I’ve asked.
Since you won’t bother trying to substantiate Obama as progressive, I’ll assume you can’t. I know I couldn’t if I tried.
The #1 reason I disrespect your entire logic… you state Nader’s presence as “benignly useless to risky.” Well, when there is so much substance being debated otherwise, how could I argue!! Of course Nader isn’t going to win, you think we’re that naive? Ironically, you think we’ll blindly support a candidate with worthlessly compromised values? All things go well, the Nader block will shift Dems left, demand dialogue on crucial issues, and everyone’s happy come November. Because, as we’ve established already, NO ONE but the Democrats themselves can be blamed for 2000 or 2004. There is that part about stolen elections, too.
And hey, don’t take words so personally. You’ve got about enough guff and resolve in you as most Democrats. No one we make such a killing.
TO ALL NADERHATERS: Try this. Look inward a little bit. Look at the state of Democrats. When you find that fire missing, maybe you’ll understand real progressives and fighters like Ralph Nader. More likely, you’ll stay bitter and keep pointing the finger.
“Yet, he still says that his top priority is “maintaining a culture of life,” and that “my number one priority is to protect you.”
Actually, the Oath of Office states:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
It does not say protect “the people,” its says protect the Constitution.
The fact that the Loonitary Decider hasn’t figured out what his job responsibilities are after eight years is reason enough to remove him from office.
If one of my employees hadn’t figured out what his job was after eight days - no less eight years - that employee would be so fired…
Something that I had wanted to ask Edwards, but never had the chance. Same question goes to Obama. Optimistic Edwards would have said yes; Obama…
“Would you be the first president since Jimmy Carter to allow Ralph Nader into the White House? Secondly, would you not wuss out on crucial legislation, as Carter was when it came to signing the Consumer Protection Agency Act?”
Hello twalsh1, where to find the proof; three posts above you now.
A question please, IF,just say, IF, the web-sites I point to document/prove what I declare, would/do you still feel Ralph has the moral standing to ask the above questions of Obama?
Enjoyed your post, thanks for a courteous question.
Real curious though what you think about RALPH & RAYTHEON!
It’s real name is _ W R A I T H E O N _
PLEASE, I hope Ralph doesn’t run again this year. I can’t bear another 8 years of another dumbo that Ralph helped get into office.
I’ll frame the issue of Ralph Nader this way.
Democrats and Americans who are not Democrats that think Ralph Nader “spoils” elections are not really believers in real democracy. They are saying they are content with a two-party dictatorship—a choice of either/or. They are discriminating against candidates and saying some people have the right to run for office while some do not. They are creating class tiers and saying Clinton/Obama/McCain/Huckabee/Paul are first class (sorry Gravel but the people I am referring to think you “dropped out” because that’s what the corporate media told them) and candidates or “spoilers” like Nader are second class.
And then on top of not believing in real democracy, they are making a lucid argument. They are saying we would like you to move over and let a Democrat get elected president because a Republican president would bring on Armageddon faster than a Democrat would. But if both would lead to the end of America, why vote either? What does it matter the rate? In fact, chances are if you want the country to be saved you will vote for the candidate who would cause Armageddon to come the quickest because perhaps we would be able to see it coming and stop it. With a Democrat in office who could lead and gradually bring on Armageddon, we might not know it was coming until it was too late.
Bottom line: Your argument against Nader is weak. And so long as you waste time explaining how Nader is a spoiler instead of trying to correct weak and spineless candidates you want Nader to bow out of the race for, your candidate will continue to lose to the Republican party machine.
It’s not Nader. It’s the fact that the Democratic Party’s strategy and tactics are poor.
I can’t wait for Meet the Press. Nader in ‘08. And god willing…Nader/Gravel in ‘08
Does Ralph Nader want to be a nuisance candidate once more?
He helped elect Bush and see the price America has had to pay for Naders help: blood, sweat, tears and an economy going south in a hurry.
Nader keep your help to yourself.
nelson February 23rd, 2008 7:27 pm
“PLEASE, I hope Ralph doesn’t run again this year. I can’t bear another 8 years of another dumbo that Ralph helped get into office.”
Typical democrat no wonder we get people like Hillary and Obama as the front-runners. Democrats will believe any body. If the MSM decides Mickey Mouse was the right mouse for president the democrats would fall all over their selves supporting him..
Ralph never helped anybody get elected. You democrats have already lost the progressives, liberals and independents by supporting Hillary and Obama for president. Quit blaming Ralph for your stupidity.
DAB February 23rd, 2008 7:52 pm
“He helped elect Bush and see the price America has had to pay for Naders help:”
DAB get your head out of the sand or where ever it is that you’ve got it. It has been shown time and time again that Nader didn’t help Bush. Gore won the election Bush stoled it and nobody stood up and hollered foul. So if your going to blame anybody blame yourself.
Over and over I have read that the Ralph Nader voters of 2000 and 2004 were those who otherwise would not have voted. On average, they were not people who otherwise would have voted for Gore. Yet, somehow the facts never seem to matter; it’s always Ralph’s fault. Even after an article like this one–where Ralph is doing exactly what he has devoted his life to, namely, excoriating the excesses of corporate America and standing up for the health and safety of average Americans — many Dems express more hatred toward Ralph than the Republicans or the hapless (and thus dangerous) FDA.
Kinda makes you wonder…
In defense of Peace Czar, I’ve got to add the following: Sure, Nader isn’t going to win if he runs. And, sure, Obama is the best we’ve got that can win.
But voting is still legal, so we could, if we could figure out how, vote FOR Nader (or the Green Pary or Gravel or someone we KNOW is on our side, as opposed to someone who MIGHT be on our side), instead of voting AGAINST McCain. And that would make a big difference in the world, instead of a possibly small one.
Maybe I’m just frustrated that We, the People actually do have the power, the power vested in our vote, to change the world, but we never use it.
“Maybe I’m just frustrated that We, the People actually do have the power, the power vested in our vote, to change the world, but we never use it.”
ticonderoga,
Thanks…good point.
You know, there are real Democrats in here and there are provocateurs (read, trolls) who rail and say all kinds of inane and self-defeating things about Nader, those who have voted for him, and basically anyone who is not in their narrow little camp.
I would hazard to guess that many of these people have never seen the inside of a caucus, or a convention hall, or spent numerous hours and logged many miles in order to try to improve the system. I would also guess that most of these back-benchers are followers who don’t dare believe that they have much power, and are actually afraid to exert it. It’s sad, really, that in a system that only works when people do work to fix things, they denigrate those who have the courage to try.
It’s okay, really. Every time they strike out, they let me know I’m on the right track.
Power to the people! Power to Ralph Nader! Power to Dennis Kucinich! Power to Eugene Debbs! Power to William Wallace! Power to me!
Ralph,please don’t run,but help Cynthyia McKinney seek the presidency under the green party or try to persuade Kucinich to ditch the Democrats and run on the Green ticket.
This time I hope that the Greens will try harder to compete in plaes where Democrats are most vulnerable, as they seem to support leaders like Polosi and Ried who are nothing but Republican co conspiritors.
By the way MIKEPETERS I hope if Ralph decides to run he will ( though knowing him I am sure he wouldn’t knowingly ) take money or checks from Rove or the Republicans,as I am sure he wouldn’t take their ideas as the Democrats do.
“Ralph,please don’t run,but help Cynthyia McKinney seek the presidency under the green party or try to persuade Kucinich to ditch the Democrats and run on the Green ticket.”
I could go along with that, though I don’t think Nader has much influence on Kucinich. I do like Cynthia McKinney, a courageous person who the Democrats ran out of Congress on rails.
What is it about Ralph Nader? He is boring. He has no plan for implementation of his grand (and very pertinent) plans. I can just see Tim Russert drooling at the chance to devour him on Meet The Press this coming weekend.
Running the country is not like filing plaintiff lawsuits–there are no recognized rules of procedure and deal making is the lubricant that makes things go and happen. This is an alien concept to Ralph.
All of that being said, who else cares more for the disadvantaged and those being abused by the establishment than Ralph?–now that DK is out of the race. Ralph does not have the answers but at least he understands the questions and that does put him light years ahead of ALL the other candidates combined.
I have to thank all posters in this thread. I’ve been on the fence lately, wavering as to who I would vote for. I’ve had this gnawing feeling of deja vu all over again, of biting the same hook that reeled me in last time and gutted me.
I had thought that if Clinton won the primaries, I’d vote for McKinney. If Obama won, I’d vote for him. After reading both the pro and con, both the sensible and inane, I’ve decided that Cynthia McKinney has my vote either way. The Democratic Party can go to hell!
Thanks - I feel much better!
God I get tired of CD sometimes. All you Green party and independents can cast your vote for someone who is not going to make any difference in the way this Nation addresses the problem of this century but quit attacking those who vote Democrat. Yeah a third party or even more would be great but it aint gonna happen soon. If everyone, including Ralph Nader looked really close to which ever investment they hold, if it’s a mutual fund, would find some small fraction of it that doesn’t agree with their core values so get off it. Nader has done more for the good of the people than any of us and most humans alive so as far as I an concerned he can put every frigging dime he has in Magellan fund and I have no problem with it.
Ralph hasn’t declared yet so Ralph-haters take your valium and relax.
Cynthia McKinney, are you kidding (?), was she even on the primary ballot in most States?
“All you Green party and independents can cast your vote for someone who is not going to make any difference in the way this Nation addresses the problem of this century but quit attacking those who vote Democrat.”
I have no beef with voters who vote Democrat or any other party or platform. My beef is with the Democratic Party as a wholly owned subsidiary of a corporatized military/industrial complex.
If this how the Democratic Party plans to address the problems of this century, then I want nothing of it.
“Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.” Benito Mussolini
This Rove-like tactic of blaming Nader for Bush in 2000 has everybody getting angry at Ralph. It takes our eye off the real culprit, the two-party system which functions to keep political candidates toward the center and so susceptible to money from the corparations. Let’s see how we can fix THAT: proportional representation, clean-money campaigns, rank voting — there are various possilities. But there’s where our energy should be going, not getting angry with some candidate who we think has “cost the X’s the election”. (Actually look at the actions of the Florida Secetary of State and find about her dirty tricks in having lots of blacks disenfranchised, etc. — something else really worth geting angry about.)
Even A Nader/Kucinich ticket would be hopeless. Both of them would be barred from all debates, the media would ignore them, corporate America would make sure that they don’t appear on the ballots while simultaneously bankrupting them with frivolous legal suits. Our only hope is that Obama or even Hillary is actually a great liar who once elected will actually represent the public for a change rather than being just another corporate sycophant.
To Peace Czar:
What about a new “CONSTITUTION PARTY” as the Democratic Party is sleeping and “off the table” …?
A Nader/Gravel or Gravel/Nader CONSTITUTION PARTY.
The US CONSTITUTION is gone if Republicans are not held accountable before this 2008 election.
Agree?
I really didn’t get the point of the article.
In the aftermath of the anthrax wonderment Bush gave the Pharmaceuticals what, 150,000,000? And didn’t they get some absurd 10 year retainer fee of 25 billion? And what was that with liability? Isn’t it like every thing else with Cheney/Bush - none? I’m wondering if that’s why some of the drug commercials started listing death as a possible adverse side effect, now they just have a blanket disclaimer - like Cheney/Bush: “We’re King so go away and leave us alone”.
And of course we do leave them alone, and we go out and get the pills anyway — humanities capacity for corruption is matched only by it’s stupidity. I did see impeachment mentioned once within the other commentary: what ever happened to 435 Ralph? You said 435 in Alaska and you said 435 in DC, what up dude? This is why Amerca is F#@%*!d - even Ralph Nadar can’t stay on topic.
Maybe the Harvard honors graduate can, if he ever gets on the right topic. I liked that list above but what are the odds: 50/50 with martial law being impossed and the election postponed (like Kucinich’s call for impeachment)?
If Nader runs independently, I hope he pursues a “safe-states strategy” this time, not where it would throw states from Obama to McCain.
Even better would be for the threat of a Nader candidacy to result in a tenured cabinet-level position for Nader in an Obama administration with free speech (without requiring Nader to join the Democratic Party), in exchange for Nader not running independently, on analogy to coalition governments in Europe. This would be win-win for everyone. Think about it.
If the Democrats can’t beat a party that literally serves the interests of 1% of the country, I do not think that is Ralph Nader’s fault.
Besides, the Democrats are constantly against democracy. Why do they not support Instant Runoff Voting? Oh yeah, that spoils the monopoly. God forbid proportional representation. Green party in congress? AWFUL! Or how about the WTO, the most undemocratic institution ever created, with an already extensive anti-human rights record, nullifying laws designed to protect people, in order to protect profits. Who passed it? Oh yeah, the Dems. Who supports expanding free trade agreements within it? Obama. Who supports a media that is(has) consolidating(ed) into an undemocratic monster? The Dems.
Please, before you come criticizing the other parties, clean your own closet out first. Some issues have been clearly laid out by USAn already.
In fact, I will give you one issue that if Democrats supported, I would vote for them in. It is an issue that nearly every CONSERVATIVE party from every other western democracy supports(And of course those on the left as well). Single Payer Health Care.
Majority Support in USA. Better Economically for people. Better results for people. Can’t make it a platform? Fuck off trying to get my vote.
Both Obama and Hillary said they would support committing a war crime in Pakistan. On national tv! Progressive? Are you serious?
Some “progressives” will vote Democrat, and that, in my opinion is ok. They have their reasons, even if I disagree with them. That is democracy. But for any one of them not to at least support (in any way, even if they dont vote for) a progressive party’s campaign, is quite silly. But not only do they not support it, they openly try to marginalize its members and blame them for bringing their conscience to the polls.
Go out and vote Green, vote Nader, vote for a progressive Dem like Kucinich for congress, do what you think is right! My vote will not spoil the election, and if it does, blame your own party for rejecting every plank of a progressive platform. If you can’t get 30% of the country to vote for you when you run against such an “awful” party, aaand you have the corporate money to do it, that is your own God damn fault.
mikepeters:
I read the salon article, which is actually the only article online. All the other links are either the same article or refer to the Salon article. But, it was interesting how he has/had these stocks. But I don’t think thats simply a reason not to vote for him. I would like to hear his response to this before I write him off based on a single online article. And also, it would be hypocritical of me because I own stocks in some of the companies mentioned
But Obama has deep connections too with the nuclear power corporations in-particular, so if he’s your man, don’t think he’s an angel as well.
Even at the risk of having my IQ reduced by dozens of points it’ll be delicious to read Democratic Underground tomorrow if Nader really announces his candidacy.
Sure, Obama gives great empty speeches, but we all know he’ll be only dropping kinder and gentler bombs in third-world nations as compared to McCain’s BOMBS. Obomber will be cleaning the needle before injecting the American people with his lethal solution, sure, but the solution will be just as deadly as McCain’s. Blind fools, Democratic voters, as always.
RUN NADER RUN!!!!!
Obama is the best shot we’ve got. He’s going to win, anyway. No way around it (unless McCain wins, which is scary). And Kucinich did endorse him, at least for one state, so he might not be too bad.
But proportional representation would be nice, as would instant run-off voting. Hey, do you think the dems and repubs would give us the above two voting systems if we asked them nicely?
What am I saying? I must be nuts.
Ralph Nader’s FEC investment listings from 2004 are shown in the news link below. In summary, they are from the following list:
1)NASDAQ 100 Trust Socially Responsible Investment Index Fund - 1.74 million dollars.
2)Fidelity Spartan Money Market Fund - 1.44 million dollars.
3)Cisco Stock 250,000 to 500,000 dollars.
Total (including minor investments) = about 3.8 million dollars.
I do not have an ethical problem with those 2004 investments. The previous posts on his mutual fund investments in this thread were from the year 2000. According to the FEC listing, the Fidelity Magellan Mutual Fund was less than 7% of his total assets in the year 2000, so his ownership in any one company from the Fidelity Magellan holding was probably less than 0.3% of his total assets in that year.
If he decides to run for office in 2008 then we will get an updated FEC list released to the public shortly. Also, Nader does not accept campaign contributions from companies, PACs, and unions.
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/05/18/election2004/20_36_195_17_04.txt
Real progressives are writing in third party progressive candidates and otherwise voting progressive in all our exchange/association because the progressive platform is the only acceptable platform.
The Demok party is hijacked by the corporations and the corporations are in the progressive crosshairs. So there is no reason for progressives to listen to the Demoks’ siren songs. And if Repuks are elected after we vote progressive, we’ll ask the Demoks why they didn’t adopt the progressive platform. Everyone knows the great majority of people identify most strongly with the progressive platform.
We’ve issued orders for the Demoks to totally vacate Iraq and impeach the top two criminals by election day. They know how to earn the progressive vote. Let’s see if they really want it.
These agencies were corrupted long before Bush, and the neoliberal economics and free trade policies of the Chicago Boys that has been embraced by government has been with us for 30 years, even Democrats like Clinton and Carter.
Kissingers memorandum, NSSM 20, issued in 1974, articulated the neo malthusian agenda so important to our national security which subsequent administrations have followed. That is to reduce global population by 500 million fewer people than projected by 2000, and 3 billion fewer than 2050. And that includes fewer Americans. So if people die due to bad drugs, unsafe food, lack of health care, wars, diseases (man made or natural), famine, etc., thats not a bad thing to them.
http://faculty.plattsburgh.edu/richard.robbins/legacy/memo%20200.htm
If there was a cure for cancer or AIDS, they probably would keep it a secret, there are too many people for them, and those in power have decided to play God and make sure the less deserving of us do not consume too many of the resources their children will need in the future.
Many of us just won’t vote for the murderers you nominate to run. Not enough people will vote for a lost cause — like the democratic nominee.
What can we say. You’re no different from the republicans.
People who are real progressives just aren’t going to vote for your party in ‘08. They just aren’t.
Get over it. You can’t lose (votes) that you don’t and won’t have anyway.
Hello kc, you stated Ralph would not knowingly take money from the GOP: that is incorrect, if it is your pleasure, Google ‘nader campaign contributions republican’
And to all the haters of the Democratic party, your points are taken, but I will vote for Obama. If we unseat the Republicans, it will be in spite of you. Not with your help.
Thanks for the courteous posts.
Democraps blame Nader for the 2000 election but also blame Bush for stealing it, they want it both ways as always and never blame themselves for anything. Let me remind you cretins in the War Party that Gore didn’t even win his OWN home state. And that votes only belong to you when voters actually VOTE for you. Any American born over the age of 35 can run for president under ANY party, don’t you forget that.
In 2004 another wimp, Kerry, conceded so fast that even his running mate was dismayed and disgusted. Senator Coward looked the other way despite massive evidence of fraud in Ohio staring him in the face for months.
In 2006 the War Party once again stabbed the American people in the back by not following what voters elected them to do. Probably because through his illegal wiretapping Bush got dirt on Pelosi, Reid and Conyers to guarantee us in Iraq for another 200 years. That’s what happens when you elect criminals to supervise other criminals.
Now Democraps want us to choose between their two corporate mobsters, Hillary and Obama and the blind fools are yet again ready to line up behind them like zombies, despite clear and abundant evidence of corruption and deceit from the War Party. Real progressives must NEVER vote for a Democrat.
Nader and other 3rd Party candidates are the only solution to Tweedledee and Tweedledum. RUN RALPH RUN.
What is the origin of the foods fed to the psychotic monkey?
Go for it Ralph!!!! ALL 50 States!!!! Call the two parties on what they really are: two side of the same counterfeit and corrupt coin. As for Obama, see “Obama’s Money Cartel. how’s he’s fronted for the most vicious firms on Wall Street” at http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16601
As for Ralph being boring, well now, have you noticed that most folk in the USA see intelligence as “boring”. How sad. Instead we get taken in by the rock and roll evangelical hype of Obama. Change! Change! Change! Ahuh. Obama and Hillary and McCain = “the continuation of corporate occupied territory”.
Nader just announced at 9:04 a.m. 2/24/08 that he is running. Watch the Democratic Party apoplectic reactionary train wreck coming. Best get to work and actually start winning votes over those that you are NOT entitled to. Good luck, You will need it!
All right Nader is in, I don’t guess I will have a reason to stay home this November.
I voted for Nader in 2000, as Gore had my state pretty much sewn up. I dont regret the vote as it was for the Green party to get to 5% in the general election and therefore be eligible for federal funding in elections which happened, but then they lost it when Nader decided to make the movement about him and not a party. Question for all the nader apologists: Why did the Green party, which rode him to popularity nationally in 2000, not invite him back? Why did Michael Moore, who is looking out for US citizens as much as anybody TRASH him after the 2000 election? The guys ego is driving him. He had a golden opportunity to build a viable third party movement using the momentum from 2000, which could break the Dem/Rep choke hold, but his ego got in the way and he pissed the opportunity away. Did he build up any new leaders? Did he build up any more support? No and no. And we are farther than a third party today than ever. Why? Because Nader is all about Nader. If he truly cared about America, he would have built up the Green party, made it sustainable and tapped into that rage against the two party system. He did not, and since then I see him as a ego driven fraud. We need a third party to keep the other two honest, problem is that whenever we get that chance (Jesse Ventura in 1998, Nader in 2000) people’s ego get in the way and the parties become a farce. I am disillusioned in the Dems/Repubs, but even more disillusioned in the Nader and Ventura’ s of the world whose enormous egos get in the way of creating any sustainable and viable opposition and third party movements. Good luck Ralph in your run and I hope it keeps your ego satisfied.
Sorry, Jason, it always was and always will be about ego, unless and until we succeed in transcending our own (egos). The collective ultimately decides who rules them, or who they allow to rule them. If enough of us transform ourselves, our rulers will reflect that, but not until. And so it goes…
WHY WAS RALPH NADER AT THE CELEBRATION OF GWB’S VICTORY? SEATED AT THE SAME TABLE AS THE OVERLY MADE-UP LADY WHO STOPPED THE VOTE IN FLORIDA?
PRAY TELL.
babka; He was just hanging out with his friends.
Doesn’t he have the right to do that?
Oh yeah, and he was PICKING UP HIS BONUS!
A previous post “I SEE HIM AS AN EGO DRIVEN FRAUD”
On this Sunday morning, Amen.
babka February 24th, 2008 9:58 am
Very interesting. It is hard to believe. Anyone know more about this? If true it does cause you to wonder. Why on Earth would Ralph attend bush’s victory celebration? Please shed light if anyone knows anything more about this.
“I SEE HIM AS AN EGO DRIVEN FRAUD” ??? Are you talking about Sen. Obama?
Praying will not get the Democrats, Nader’s votes. But good luck trying. Go ahead Democrats, attack Nader with your obsession and stupidity and watch more and more votes switch to Ralph. Show us your true non-belief in democracy and watch those of us who believe in it abandon you in droves. C’mon, piss us off some more, and every time that you do we will make a contribution to the Nader campaign and volunteer for Ralph. Go for it, Dems! What do you have to lose? Ahh….uh…. plenty. Eh?
Big Bad Bob February 24th, 2008 9:26 am
“If not for him Bush would never been selected.”
That’s not true at all. It has been shown time and time again that’s not true. Why don’t you go and register as a republican because that is what you really are. The Democratic Party has been taken over by former republicans that didn’t like the fact that the Republican Party had been taken over by the nazi party.
What is wrong with you people here????? Haven’t you idiots figured out by now Ralph Nader can’t win!!! That all you are doing is throwing your vote away! All you can do is put another neocon Republican into office! To destroy what’s left of our country! But, still you insist on following Nader over the cliff. It’s unbelievable how some people never learn! All I can do is shake my head at the ignorance that passes for intelligence!
If we all fall for the logic that we shouldn’t vote for third parties because they can’t win we self-fulfill our own prophecy. It’s a circular vicious cycle. They can’t win because we don’t vote for them. We don’t vote for them because we don’t think they can win. They won’t win at first silly. It’s a process. It will take time.
We need to break away from our fears because the Democrats are just Republicans in drag. Bush was able to basically railroad congress on everything he wanted to accomplish because he could always count on enough Democratic votes to implement his agenda.
The Democrats are a disgrace. They can’t even impeach Bush after he has basically admitted he broke the law when he spied on US citizens and tortured prisoners. Can you imagine what the Republicans would have done to Bill Clinton if he’d had done that instead of hosing a cute young intern? They would have crucified him on the spot. The Democrats are beyond being disgraced. They are an utterly pathetic, weak, cowardly and repugnant party that works hand in glove with the Republicans. They are beyond contempt. They are like stress sacks. Useless.
Little by little we need to build a new party. A party that represents the interests of people not corporate power. The Democrats can’t do this because they represent the same interests Republicans do. The power brokers are no fools, they fund both parties and in turn both parties are beholden to their masters.
Don’t be scared by those crying that that now is not the time. That’s what they will always say. The sky will forever be falling. They said that last time and they’ll say it next time. Never will be the time to break with the Dims for them. Hopeless bunch. They are like frogs that slowly get cooked because they are too stupid to jump out of the pot as the heat gets slowly turned up. They stay in the pot until they get cooked. Dump the Dims! Vote 3rd party! When enough of us do we can stand, we can fight and we can force change! NEVER SURRENDER!
I have never, in my 55 years of life, seen a better candidate for President of the US than this man.
babka February 24th, 2008 9:58 am
“WHY WAS RALPH NADER AT THE CELEBRATION OF GWB’S VICTORY? SEATED AT THE SAME TABLE AS THE OVERLY MADE-UP LADY WHO STOPPED THE VOTE IN FLORIDA?”
Got a link. I’ve already done a quick search and couldn’t find any reference to it. Seeing how you shouted it out and didn’t supply a link to information about it, I doubt you. Plus if that was true don’t you think it would have been plastered all over the WORLD news by now? I can shout to but only for emphasis. Prove me wrong and I will apologize.
tumbleweed February 24th, 2008 10:21 am
“What is wrong with you people here????? Haven’t you idiots figured out by now Ralph Nader can’t win!!! That all you are doing is throwing your vote away!………..All I can do is shake my head at the ignorance that passes for intelligence!
While your running down the same road, maybe at a slower pace but still the same road.
jasoncocobolo February 24th, 2008 9:38 am
You made some good points. It bothers me that Nader hasn’t built up the Greens. I’m not really sure he is even a member. I think he just uses them to get on the ballot. Ralph has done a great service to this country in many ways but you made valid points.
If not with Ralph then with Cynthia McKinney or someone else. We need to break with the two party duopoly regardless of who is at the top of the ticket. There are other parties out there. If only we all could unite.
tailcap February 24th, 2008 10:24 am
“If we all fall for the logic that we shouldn’t vote for third parties because they can’t win we self-fulfill our own prophecy……….Don’t be scared by those crying that that now is not the time. That’s what they will always say. The sky will forever be falling. They said that last time and they’ll say it next time.”
They have been saying it for years and years, and will continue to do so as long as we allow it. This is something that was started by the powerful corporate news media and people bought into it. Quit buying into the trash coming from the MSM. If you want to see a change in this country abandon the Republican and the Democratic Party. Other wise shut up and sleep in the bed you’ve made. Hope doesn’t get it done.
Go, Nader, Go.
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
tumbleweed. You’re the ignorant one. Have you not read about US history and seen that the major positive changes in it have come from 3rd parties and their influence, from candidates that had NO hope of winning? Like Eugene Debs, from whence came big gains in getting workers rights, social security, etc. So, go ahead, call Nader folk “ignorant” from the comfort of your own ignorance and watch how that persuasive tactic turns more and more people away from the Democrats! And oh, why are you so anti-democratic? Anytime, anyone votes for the candidate of their choice they are not throwing away their vote. How dare you decide what my vote is? Who the hell are you? Wait. I know. You and your party are the ones that through their arrogance make it necessary for someone like Nader to run. Thank you, by the way.
Nader is NOT interested in being President. Nader sees the dialog in the primary debates are bullshit as will be the “debates” between the final candidates so he wants to shape the debate, take it away from “who’s the most patriotic” to real issues.
Your number one priority should be to voluntarily submit yourself for Rehab, I think there is room where Brittany Spears left a vacancy. If you thought you were helping me and the nation when you helped Bush get elected you definitely are nuts.
If you think you are helping me now please enter yourself in the nearest psychiatric ward immediately you are crazier than the lunatic you will be helping madman McCrazy.
If you come to your senses soon and support the greenest most liberal candidate in the race, including you, then disregard this post.
“Hello kc, you stated Ralph would not knowingly take money from the GOP: that is incorrect, if it is your pleasure, Google ‘nader campaign contributions republican’”
Did that, Mike. Here are some snippets from the top search results. *Please pay special attention to the last snippet.* Funny how things can be slanted a particular way depending on how we want to see them, huh?:
From the NY Times: “With the apparent assistance of the state Republican Party, Ralph Nader appears likely to secure a spot on the Michigan presidential ballot. But Democrats are calling for him to withdraw and are threatening to file a complaint against the Republicans, charging that they contributed illegally to the Nader campaign.”
From the SF Chronicle: “Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader — still not on the ballot in a single state — has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party, an analysis of federal records show.”
From Salon.com: “According to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington — whose name sounds as if Nader could once have been its founder — the Nader presidential campaign received illicit assistance for its petition drive in Oregon last weekend from two local conservative organizations, which were “encouraged” by President Bush’s campaign committee.”
And finally, this from CounterPunch:
“October 19, 2004
Who’s Really in Bed with Republican Funders?
Republican Contributions: $10.7 Million for Kerry vs. $111,700 for Nader
By CounterPunch Wire
Washington, D.C.
Today, the Independent presidential campaign of Ralph Nader and Peter Miguel Camejo released the preliminary findings of research conducted by the Center for Responsive Politics. The findings demonstrate that Senator John Kerry has thousands of contributors who have supported the Republican Party. Kerry has more than ten million dollars donated by Republican donors.
The anti-Nader Democrats have spread their big lie to discredit Nader and silence his anti-war and progressive message that Kerry could not rebut. The anti-Naderites hired Stanley Greenberg to conduct surveys and focus groups to determine how best to smear Nader. They found that falsely claiming Nader was funded and controlled by Republicans was the most effective line they could use a line that can’t pass the laugh test when compared to the facts. They announced their findings at the Democratic Convention and then spread the lie through the Naderfactor.com and the United Progressives for Victory.
But the reality was only 700 Republican contributions (no individuals, but individual contributions) had given donations to the Nader campaign and most of the contributors were people Nader had worked with on justice issues in the past. Even among these 700 the Democrats received more money than Nader-Camejo — $111,700 to $146,000. But, the Democrats continue to use the Big Lie despite the facts.”
voxclamantis wrote:
“Ralph doesn’t expect to become president. He wants to create a power structure that represents the people, and this is a longer term project than our perennial quick fix mentality seems capable of grasping.”
Well, I wish this were true. How many times has he run? What is left behind? Practically nothing.
This time he has completely blown off the Green Party process. Previous runs were supposedly about building the Green Party and he was supposedly one of many possible candidates this year, including Cynthia McKinney. What’s up with that? The previous efforts have been shockingly poor at ‘building’ the Green Party.
We do need a healthy, growing Green Party. More members, more money, more volunteers. Nader’s bid this time is outside of that structure and creating nothing. No party structure, NOTHING. That’s what will be left after his campaign.
McKinney is raising issues that Nader won’t. I’m upset that he pretended to be in the running for the Green Party candidacy and then blew them off. This is going to be bad for the Green Party and it makes no sense to me. Obviously there are a bunch of people on this forum who are Nader supporters, but I’m betting you never worked for previous campaigns as I have. This is really a disaster and very annoying. I will NOT be supporting Nader in this dead-end effort.
The Green Party convention is in Chicago: Thursday, July 10th to Sunday, July 13th.
http://www.gp.org/index.php
tailcap February 24th, 2008 10:53 am
“I think he just uses them to get on the ballot.”
I could be wrong because I can’t seem to locate any information on it, but I think he is running as an independent. Green party won’t do me any good anyway. There not recognized by the state I live in.
Stiv: Great points and is exactly how I feel. Nader as an independent hurts more than he helps.
iammyself February 24th, 2008 11:15 am
“Hello kc, you stated Ralph would not knowingly take money from the GOP: that is incorrect,”
You are absolutely incorrect. He stated on Meet the Press this morning that he would take personal contributions from any individual regardless of party affiliation only. That’s a big difference from accepting money from the GOP, big business or lobbyists.
tailcap: Right, we do need to unite, and that is and always be the problem with a viable third party. There were golden opportunities in 2000 with Nader and more locally, 2002 with Tim Penny. Both for the Greens and the Indepent Party, they had nationally recognized names in Nader and Jesse Ventura. Both could have gotten off the ground and made a viable third choice, which would have kept the other two honest. What happened? Nader got selfish, used the green party and destroyed their credibility to a nation at large. For the independents, Ventura refused to back Tim Penny, refused to fund raise, Penny ran out of money and lost his shot at showing that the circus that was Jesse Ventura was more than that. Penny would have made a great leader of MN and given the indepedent party legitimacy. It didnt happen and we lost years of grass roots party building and seemed to start from scratch.
Sorry iammyself sometimes I get confused on who’s saying What to whom.
jasoncocobolo February 24th, 2008 11:28 am
“What happened? Nader got selfish, used the green party and destroyed their credibility to a nation at large.”
I’d like to hear how he did that. Did I miss something? Can’t seem to remember ever reading anything that would make me believe that. Care to post some link’s.
Dear Ralph Nader:
I am very glad you have decided to run. This will give you a bully pulpit to inform the people about the things that really matter which no other candidate dares talk about. You would certainly make the best president by far. And you will force the other candidates to address these issues.
I would like to see you really tie into the Republican mafia as only you can, but leave Obama alone as he is the only hope for us to get out from under Republican jackboots. We really can’t take this Republican nightmare much longer.
After you have campaigned against the fascist hordes and just prior to the presidential elections, I would like to see you drop out of the race and back Obama.
I realize the Democrats are full of conservative sellouts so I will vote a mixed ballot with Greens when they have a good chance of winning or when the Dem candidate leads by a safe margin, and with progressive Dems when their candidacy is threatened by Repubs.
It is frustrating that a well informed person can have his or her vote nullified by a vote from an ignorant conservative clod or stolen by fascists, but that is democracy and it’s vulnerability. Democratic persons trust that all the people, given all the information, will make the right choices.
I hope your candidacy will inform the public, force candidates to address Green issues and finally help Obama get the presidency.
wouldn’t it be nice if all the Dems and Dem consultants would take all the time, energy and money they pour into despising Ralph Nader and put it toward fighting corporate malfeasance and domination of our economy?
I”m not going to hold my breath.
By the way, I’m a lifelong Dem.
ezeflyer February 24th, 2008 11:41 am
“I realize the Democrats are full of conservative sellouts so I will vote a mixed ballot with Greens when they have a good chance of winning or when the Dem candidate leads by a safe margin, and with progressive Dems when their candidacy is threatened by Repubs.”
That is a cop out, an excuse for losing. Vote for the person who best represents the needs of the people. That’s the only way were ever going to take back this country.
When they have a good chance of winning my behind, you just want to be on the winners side.
“We do need a healthy, growing Green Party. More members, more money, more volunteers. Nader’s bid this time is outside of that structure and creating nothing. No party structure, NOTHING. That’s what will be left after his campaign.”
I couldn’t agree more, Stiv.
Nader is not building any party, though, I still defend his right to run for any damn thing he wants to. He has issues, ideas, points he wants to make, and godspeed to him. I see no point in voting for him, so I won’t.
As far as the Green Party goes - I wish them well. While I’m no longer a Green, I know that by and large their platform is right and necessary - so, I personally try to live them. That the Democrats have consistently pissed on these progressive values for the last 30 years does everyone a disservice.
“I hope your candidacy will inform the public, force candidates to address Green issues and finally help Obama get the presidency.”
I hope Obama will even try to address Green/green issues. As part of a much larger corporate machine, I’m not holding my breath. I’ll work to try to make it happen, but I won’t expect it to.
rickster469:
You think trolls apologize that easily?
—-
Speaking of that, you just can watch the haters climb out of the woodwork.
If someone went through this thread, the number of illogical & naysayers grows by leaps and bounds. Typically it’s just the small handful of clowns, but what a magnet a Nader candidacy is.
At least by some point this election season they’ll all have to recognize the rather inconvenient truth that Nader wasn’t responsible for Gore’s truth. Might actually drag you all up to a level of maturity to review the real factors in play.
Know that feeling of “empowerment” some* shit-brained Dems on this thread have? It’s inversely related to any lingering enlightenment. Power over substance. Popularity before principles. What’s left? Oh right, power and popularity that stand for nothing.
*note that I said “some.” Contain your hissy-fits.
I WANT to beleive Mr. Nader, I really do. I’d love to see a Nader/Gravel leadership. I WANT to beleive that a 3rd party can rise up out of the mess this country is in and save us all, change things for the better.
And I had begun (by process of elimination) to beleive that Obama could give it a good try. I think MANY people in the US are really excited about him, and I think he has a chance of winning against McCain, or other Bush cronies.
BUT
I think that running as a 3rd party can ONLY have ONE outcome, and it makes me wonder WHY Nader is running and WHO is backing him.
The outcome?
That the votes will be close between dems and reps. I think that there people are tired of republican b.s. but there are still a lot of people in this country who won’t vote for a black man. So I think it will be close, and since Nader will be taking away from the dem side of the ticket, his running will CAUSE the republican candidate to win, and we’ll have 8 more years of this craziness!
And THAT makes me wonder who’s financing him…
I’m voting for Nader. Comparing his segment of Meet the Press, 15 minutes stuffed with enough facts and figures and cogent arguments to make your head explode, to the remainder of the program devoted to the vacuous content of the other three campaigns, did it for me. Honest to god, it was nearly scary watching the Blue Pill Media close in after Nader, pretending that clever insults and speech copying and sexual indiscretions and dopey slogans and sucking up to superdelegates are the substance of this election. This stuff is aimed at children.
The clincher was Ralph’s assertion that if the democrats can’t win this election by a decisive landslide they need to fold their tents and disappear. I agree. Let’s give moderate democrats and disillusioned conservatives a chance to replace George Bush with something somewhat better. I’m not a moderate democrat myself. I’m a progressive. A year after Obama wins the election, when all of you two-party aficionados are bitching because you still can’t get a progressive agenda out of your government, I’ll be able to say I voted for it and you didn’t.
The “spoiler” argument is an argument from weakness and fear. It’s the electorate, not the progressive community, that needs to wake up to the misery the GOP has inflicted on them. It is the soporific majority, not us, which needs to shift to the left and put the democrats back in power. I believe it should happen and will happen. But that move alone will not pull the country from the grip of corporate lobbyists and secretive, militant kleptocrats unless a highly visible, progressive block of voters remains unsatisfied and demonstrates that our votes can not be bought with empty prattle and dog kibbles.
No,Ralph,your number one priority is to get Republicans elected. I can’t forgive you ,nor the narcisistic,self righteous self styled, “progressives”,who support you. Go to Hell!
Peace Czar February 24th, 2008 11:56 am
“You think trolls apologize that easily?”
No, but I’m not always right either. If I make a mistake, I won’t take it as a slap on the face, if you point it out to me.
Ralph took money from Republicans? Well. Of course, he did. Do Obama/Hillary not take money from Republicans? Of course they do, and from giant large Republican entities called: CORPORATIONS! See below. Democrats once again want it both ways for them purity is only for the other guy, not their candidate.
BARACK OBAMA (D)
Top Contributors
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00009638
Goldman Sachs $421,763
Ubs Ag $296,670
Lehman Brothers $250,630
National Amusements Inc $245,843
JP Morgan Chase & Co $243,848
Sidley Austin LLP $226,491
Citigroup Inc $221,578
Exelon Corp $221,517
Skadden, Arps Et Al $196,420
Jones Day $181,996
Harvard University $172,324
Citadel Investment Group$171,798
Time Warner $155,383
Morgan Stanley $155,196
Google Inc $152,802
University of Cal. $143,029
Jenner & Block $136,565
Kirkland & Ellis $134,738
Wilmerhale Llp $119,245
Credit Suisse Group $118,250
HILLARY CLINTON (D)
Top Contributors
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008
DLA Piper $471,750
Goldman Sachs $413,361
Morgan Stanley $362,700
Citigroup Inc $350,895
Lehman Brothers $241,870
JP Morgan Chase & Co $214,880
EMILY’s List $213,266
National Amusements Inc $210,010
Kirkland & Ellis $179,676
Greenberg Traurig Llp $177,800
Skadden, Arps et al $167,796
Merrill Lynch $165,042
Cablevision Systems $145,313
Time Warner $144,977
Microsoft Corp $143,459
Bear Stearns $141,835
Latham & Watkins $138,598
Patton Boggs $137,200
Ernst & Young $126,865
PricewaterhouseCoopers $121,939
Not surprised to see you rear your intervening head now Ralph, just shows the level of desperation coming out of the GOP these days….. only one problem….been there, done that…. In case yo