Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiNader Still Follows Cameras, Proudly Offers Alternative
DENVER - If the same happens in November to Barack Obama, that's just one more electoral incident for which the Connecticut native won't issue an apology. If Democratic politicians want to push him aside, he argues, then they are welcome to borrow some of his "progressive populist" ideas. In his view, a vote belongs to no one until it's earned.
![[Ralph Nader is in Denver this week for the "corporate-saturated Democratic National Convention." He hosted a Wednesday night rally, taking his own stage about an hour after the Democratic choice for vice president, Sen. Joe Biden, stepped in front of the Pepsi Center thousands.(Photograph: Jeff Chiu/AP)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/nader.jpg "nader.jpg")
The veteran presidential candidate is used to the blame and doesn't
flinch when it's mentioned over and over in his interviews. "It's a
very ugly syndrome in Democratic politics, because it's a scapegoat
syndrome," he said Wednesday. Anyway, he insists, the win was stolen
from Gore in the Florida vote tally.
"If the Democrats don't get over this, they will never look themselves in the mirror and say, 'Oh me, oh my, why isn't our party landsliding the worst Republicans in the history of the Republican Party?'"
Nader is in Denver this week for the "corporate-saturated Democratic National Convention." He hosted a Wednesday night rally, taking his own stage about an hour after the Democratic choice for vice president, Sen. Joe Biden, stepped in front of the Pepsi Center thousands.
Nader's chief thrust right now is trying to get himself in the presidential debates.
He plans to be in Minnesota next week, trying to siphon attention from the Republican National Convention, too. The independent candidate, who touts single-digit support in recent nationwide polls and has petitioned his way onto the 2008 ballots of more than three dozen states, has been steadily running for president for almost two decades, and he's learned to go where the cameras are.
And when he seizes that attention, the iconic former consumer advocate attacks both parties evenly as corporate stooges. When asked if he prefers one over another, he acknowledges his belief that the Democrats are better on Social Security, Medicare and civil rights. But, he said, "I don't think this country deserves a least worse choice."
His criticisms of the Democratic Party were far stronger, however, when addressing those who came to hear him at the University of Denver arena Wednesday night.
"This party is sick," he told the 4,000 mostly college-age people. "It's decaying. It's lost its soul. ... They never talk about the poor. They talk about the middle class." Nader brought up the "bottom 100 million" people in the country, saying they do the heavy lifting and "service us in all kinds of ways while they are underpaid, while they are overcharged."
The candidate shouted, "It's our job to sweep the rascals out of the political forums who have corrupted our country!"
Nader argued for the inclusion of third-party candidates. "Dissent is the mother of ascent," he said, to cheers. "Almost everything we like about our country started with minority dissenters."
Earlier in the day, Nader's criticism was leveled at the journalists covering the race, who are "drawn into a vortex of greater and greater trivia."
Not that his own rally was free of light entertainment and celebrity appearances.
Actor Sean Penn had high billing at this festival of The Others. Penn referred to the nearby convention as "the prom."
The 74-year-old Nader promised he would - before November - personally campaign "up and down the state of Connecticut," where he's historically managed to seize a little higher percentage than the votes he gets nationwide. It's his home-state crowd.
"We will let the people of Connecticut know that even though Obama is likely to take it, they at least have a choice to send the Democrats a message that their votes are not going to be taken for granted."
When asked whether he'll put his town, Winsted, on the campaign trail, he smiled. "Yes, of course."
After all, Winsted's town meetings influenced the life he would choose. "I saw active citizens," he said. "I saw squirming politicians, and I saw free speech in action.
"That was a far greater civic education than anything I learned in my formal education."
Nader concluded his words at the University of Denver Wednesday night with his own civic lesson, goading his young audience, particularly those who don't vote:
"If only you knew the power you have at this young age," he said. "Chuck the iPod once in a while. Stop listening to non-stop music, which is blowing out your mind. And get serious.
"Read the grim lesson of history, here and abroad. When people do not turn on to politics, politics will turn on them."
180 Comments so far
Show AllI'm still supportive of 3rd parties. They may not have the money, personality cult, and power propelling them, the things unfortunately needed to capture the big gold belt in American politics, but the underground always influences the mainstream eventually.
So think of people like Nader and McKinney as innovators.
They are potentially to Obama and Biden what Diamond Head are to Metallica, what The Buzzcocks were to Green Day, and what Afrika Bambaataa is to any platinum hip-hop act you can think of.
Yeah, Nader rocks regardless of what he listens to.
One more time: voting for a candidate whose positions are opposed to yours makes a farce out of the democratic franchise.
Partisan sanctimony doesn't persuade. It didn't in 2000. It hasn't at any time in-between.
Here's a funny story:
I go to these atheist meetings. I end up getting into this huge debate about the Green Party with this vehemently anti-Bush fellow. (This is somewhat ironic, considering how much these atheists complain about never having atheist candidates to vote for, while the person running for secretary of state here under the Greens is openly atheistic).
This guy gets pretty heated. I get heated because I'm being attacked as an enabler of the Bush Administration for being a Green. As a person who's engaged in an amble amount of anti-Bush direct action, including dressing up as him in a naked suit for an emperor-wears-no-clothes type protest when he came to my town, I took this a little personally.
Eventually, he yells something about 9-11, and the debate is officially over.
I fudged, and didn't say half the things I could have about Democrats voting for Bush in Florida, or forcing him to name one thing the Dems have stood up for in the last eight years.
Anyway, here's what's funny: he is blaming me for enabling the Bush Administration by voting Green -- all while wearing Nikes and drinking a Coke.
Crazy, hey?
Now that all the pundit driven comments have moved on to their next target let me get down to the heart of the matter.
Something that is at the root cause of all the problems we face was quoted by Bill Moyers in the speech entitled "the fight of our lives". Just as viable today as when it was written and given who said it I am surprised it has not been given more consideration.
I quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
During his brief campaign in 2000, before he was ambushed by the dirty tricks of the religious right in South Carolina and big money from George W. Bush's wealthy elites, John McCain said elections today are nothing less than an "influence peddling scheme in which both parties compete to stay in office by selling the country to the highest bidder."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the very least we know at least at that time McCain was aware of the problem. I wonder if Obama would to take a crack at saying something more succinct and to the point.
To the American people, Republicans and Democrats, just stop supporting that form of politics; period.
g
Score another one for the Oligarchy. The divided progressives are conquered once again. Labour is already divided and conquered. who's next? who remains? you lose (lost?).
Vote against the $$$ folks. Follow the $$$, the Oligarchy wants BHO not JMcC cuz he's too unstable and liable to over-shoot the plan.
If you want progressive government then vote for progressives. Don't vote for bought-and-paid-for shills who can read a script.
Hmm.
Just waded through 168 posts to see how many critics would counter Nader on his actual positions.
Zero, as expected.
well of course that is why many here are voting for him as opposed to voting for Obama because he is not McCain; if that that logic ever made any sense.
None of the discussion in this thread is even about policy. That is why so many who come to CD who are seriously searching for answers and want to join in a discussion, perhaps a movement that could address the problems we face, simply say nothing and walk away in disgust.
g
I understand the Democrats position in this thread; I was one and held that position for many years; things have changed.
I posted the following remarks to Norman Solomom's thread covering the Dem's convention but it is exactly why I will be voting for Nader this year...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still the dilemma as stated suggests we must continue a "lesser of two evils" strategy even though by doing so we continue the destruction of democracy in this nation.
The people have been betrayed. That is the big story here.
Those candidates that ran a candidacy built on speaking truth to power, restoring our democracy and Constitution were defeated before they ever began.
The corporate owned media manufactured, advertised, packaged, and delivered the candidates who would satisfy the needs of Corporate America and the leadership of both parties took delivery of them.
The idea that the candidates representing the parties for the presidency are the best this nation has to offer is a cruel joke.
And the common people, the men woman and children of this nation desperately in need of a government that is not complicit in their exploitation by these same corporations, what of them?
Desperately chanting "change", and "yes we can", will not challenge the militarism that is draining the life blood from this nation, or the globalization that has outsourced the American dream right out from under us.
America's soul has been hocked for cheap TV's, and even cheaper entertainment to watch on them. Feel good slogans will not restore our decaying infrastructure, reduce the deficit, or pay off the mountain of debt in this nation; a job at Walmart will not replace a good paying manufacturing job; guaranteed health care will not fix our badly broken health care system; and lastly increased military spending or continuing the absolute fraudulent "war on terror" in any form will not make this nation or it's people more safe.
In my view, you can take this message back to Denver. When the American people finally wake up to the theft of their legacy by their own trusted servants; when this nation is hollowed out from unbridled greed facilitated by a government bribed into leaving us unprotected from it; when the misery index and personal pain a once proud people must endure finally hits home; then and perhaps only then will the American people refuse to settle for a "lesser of two evils" ever again. I am starting now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem with the tone and divisive quality to the discussion in this thread from my perspective is a measure of the success the right has archived in fragmenting the left after the last great uprising of people during the 60's.
The only two times in American history when progressive policy was enacted into law was when there was enough social upheaval to threaten the government and business as usual.
Clintonian tactical retreat, centrist wall street friendly, triangulation to adopt the very soul of the opposition so you can archive some sort of majority will never do this. And the personal attacks, the infighting among the victims of this sad situation only serves to deepen the despair and move any possible cohesive response out of reach.
g
Finally, CD is giving Nader a show. Now, let's do it more often !
It's obvious ignorance is alive and well in Obama supporters!!! Do all of you secretly hope we have another Republican President who will destroy what's left of the country???? Or are all of you delusional in thinking you are making a statement or are are actually going to do something about the status quo????? Unbelievable!!!
It's obvious ignorance is alive and well in Nader supporters!!! Do all of you secretly hope we have another Republican President who will destroy what's left of the country???? Or are all of you delusional in thinking you are making a statement or are are actually going to do something about the status quo????? Unbelievable!!!
Sorry. You DEMOCRATS approved the Supremes and you approved Gonzalez and Mukasey. Democrats (Clinton) created and approved NAFTA, voted for the PATRIOT ACT I and II, torture, extreme rendition, and you approved the illegal war on Iraq. You voted for eliminating habeus corpus. YOU put impeachment off the table. Your candidate Obama is for the death penalty, nuclear power, the Afghan war, all for "contractors" remaining in Iraq, and his running mate Joe Biden is in the back pocket of the banking industry. Joe whose Iraq solution is partitioning Iraq into 3 parts. He pushed through the so-called Consumer Protection Act which makes it tougher for people to file for bankruptcy. That should make you appreciate your credit card interest and debt as Joe is from the state, Delaware, that has no usury laws. Joe's son is an MBNA (credit card industry) lobbyist. Joe voted FOR the Iraq war. So spare us the illusion that change from the current Bush or McCain policies is on the way with an Obama presidency. And stop doing what the Republicans do best, i.e., making people afraid. Nader supporters won't fear the worser of two bad candidates. We abhor and reject them. Obama says that McCain has voted 95% of the time with George Bush. Close behind him is the Democratic Party who has done the same. What is destroying the country is the two-headed Corporate Party. This two-headed Corporate Party IS THE STATUS QUO! And you LOVE IT! Yes, that is indeed, "unbelievable".
sorry, but wasn't it Barack Obama who was calling for "change", but where is this "change" now? He and Biden talking about "the real war", the political war against russia, china and india, they talk about less oil, and in the same time, they talking about poltical war against russia and so on...sorry, but there is a huge american oil-pipeline project through georgia and Barack Obama and Biden are standig behind it, so where are all those alternative energy projects??? Where??? The Europeans are planning huge off shore wind parks and what is america doing? Under the line, the USA is having one party with two very close wings. But is a pity, there is no real altervative, Naders Green Party could be one!!!
Common on America, wake up!
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9975
well it's obvious who the ignorant one is. are you so much so that you fail to look at the rhetoric versus the record of obama? perhaps if you would, you'd realize just how misled you are by your own laziness and by watching too much of the media on t.v.
there is no way in hell that a true progressive would vote for corporate candidates be they democrat or republican.
the statement to make is plain and simple. it's why the democrats could well keep losing again and again by giving us worthless corporate sell-outs who pretend to be for the people but are really for big-business and their money.
It's intelligence that is alive and well in Nader supporters.
Shake off corporate corruption and domination. The only vote that doesn't count is the one not counted...Vote Nader!!!!
Thank Goodness for one lone Real American who stands tall for the constitution, who is incorruptible, honest, forthright, and with the only formidable track record of little out for the little guy.
I hope he hands the DemoCans another bitter lesson by snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
No Megacorporate candidate will get the Naderite vote! It looks like we're going to have to fracture the Dem vote again since they won't stand up for the constitution against crooked big business and crooked big government.
Ben Franklin The First American
they sure won't. but the lesson needs to be repeated over and over.....alas.
When Ralph Nader is gone, and no one is stepping in his place who can as succinctly and rationally explain issues that are causing injustice; and the politicians are allowed to act as the corporate whores they are without any challenge; then you will understand that this is the year that you, the reader, could have made a difference.
This is the year to vote third party and send a message once and for all that the democratic party has crossed the line as to what is acceptable in a civilized society, they maybe the democratic party might change (but I doubt it. Just look at how they 'changed' the last four years.)
Vote Green Party, support Nader. The less votes the democrats get and more they will have to consider our positions.
“If there is no struggle, there is no progress,” declared Frederick Douglass in 1857, in response to those who suggested that the great abolitionist was pushing too hard for an end to human bondage. “Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”
Matt Gonzalez, Nader's VP choice does just fine in explaining Nader's position and working for them. Nader is working a base line from which others will follow in his footsteps. Count on it as Demopublicans and Republicrats become more and more alike and irrelevant.
Matt Gonzalez ran a brilliant, grass-roots, shoe string campaign , against the odious, oily, and well-funded Newsome here in my fair city, and came close to beating him.He raised a lot of hopes, and then dashed them, after he lost the election, by folding his tent and disappearing from the local political scene.Or maybe he just went to sulk in it.He turned out to have less staying power than the average money-driven politician.He's a complicated man, is Mr Gonzalez, but I wouldn't put much faith in him.
I've been telephone "polled" twice this election season. First by the AFL-CIO, and then by the DNC. In each case I was asked who I supported, McCain or Obama. I replied "Ralph Nader."
I asked the DNC caller how she would score my answer. She said, "Oh we have a box for Nader. We just don't mention him because he's not a major candidate."
Check the circular logic. Nader is not a "major candidate" because he is at 5-8% in the polls. Therefor pollsters ask people to choose between McCain and Obama. This skews the polling numbers . . . which are used to justify the biased poll question.
Just imagine if pollsters asked people to choose between McCain, Obama and Nader. Nader would be polling over 20% immediately. When THAT number was reported in the press, Nader's numbers would surge even higher. If only we had fairness and integrity in our polling and our media, we could have a Ralph Nader administration.
I agree with Pat Gray (August 28th, 2008 5:25 pm), who said:
"I fear that Obama is the worser of the two evils. McCain is an old man who will only serve one term. He will be up against a Democratic Congress and can't do much harm."
"With a President Obama it will be like it was for Clinton. We are so happy that the Democrat was elected that he gets a honeymoon period to pass all sorts of legislation. Like how Clinton passed NAFTA, the end of welfare as we know it, and the banking deregulations that caused the current economic crisis in our monetary system."
I think Pat's analysis is correct. Moreover (measured by his voting record in the Senate) Obama's agenda is far to the right of even Bill Clinton's. Significantly lower wages and benefits (resulting from amnesty for migrants and their neo-slave employers), increased military spending and a unilateral invasion of Pakistan, public funding for a massive expansion of nuclear power (including taking financial responsibility for disasters) --- all of these could become reality with an Obama administration backed by a Democratic Congress.
We need Ralph Nader more than ever.
following up on ezflyer -
What would the numbers be if Nader, the Greens, the Libertarians and Indies united?
We must get off the right/left political axis. We must progress in a new dimension and reach around to all those disaffected.
Then we would have the numbers to make a difference. Perhaps a crucial difference.
Who can bring the disaffected together?
Some few years ago, the Republican Party was in danger of extinction. They formed a strategy using all experts and activists their Big Money could buy and struck attractive deals with the formerly non-voting religious right that is today their base and to which it owes its success at the voting booth.
Progressive Dems may not have the will or the corporate resources of an oligarchy to undertake such a program but are equal or superior in number to conservatives. So what stops progs from forming alliances and coalitions with the progressive base in the Green Party, the Libertarian Party and Independents separately from the conservative Republican-Lite wing majority of the Democratic Party? Such a coalition would give Progressive Democrats a majority vote in their party. And there is much common ground on which to build these coalitions.
I think one thing that stands in the way of such a coalition is that Progressive Democrats are waiting in vain for their conservative leadership to make such a move. And that Greens, anarchists and Indys, the greatest progressive organizations are a large and diverse grassroots bunch that can't get together.
That Kucinich, Nader and other progressive leaders do not unite on a strategy is disturbing. It could be explained by many reasons, but I think one reason is the refusal to copy the Repug success of having experts develop a common strategy toward forming these alliances and so avoiding internal squabbles.
If progressive leaders cannot or will not take the initiative, we will likely be bitching and moaning on CD forever.
"If progressive leaders cannot or will not take the initiative, we will likely be bitching and moaning on CD forever."
Not forever:
North Pole Ice Cap Melting Faster Than Ever
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/08/28
Carry on.
We're lucky to have one honest candidate running for President. Even if Ralph Nader only gets a few percent of the vote, his candidacy still preserves a little decency in American politics, at least around the fringes.
Meanwhile, back at the major-party conventions, we have a "choice" between...
the grinning sociopath Barack Obama...
or John McCain, a down-on-all-fours "anal hoover" for George W. Bush.
Jacob Freeze
I see no real change with Obama or McCain. If there is a difference between the two I can't see it. It's easy to talk change when you don't offer any plans for change. There is no difference between the democratic party and the republican party. The only real choice I have is to vote for Nader because the green party isn't recognized in the state I live in. The way I see it, McCain has all but won the election.
Rickster
Assume for a moment that there is something approximating a God and a judgment day, to which we are called to account for our lives. (From a moral standpoint, the template is really quite useful, regardless of whether you believe in a bearded Catholic God, as most of us do not.) OK so there you are, standing all dead and used up before the Big Guy, and He says to you "Pal, I put you into the world to make it into the kind of place your own conscience tells you it ought to be. Every so often you got the chance to choose nice over nasty, fair over self-serving and so forth. In a democracy, every so often you got a chance to choose big, a big leader, whose idea of a good world is pretty close your own. So, Mr. dead guy, tell Me. Did you make that choice, or did you read your Machiavelli and pick the least corrupt candidate you thought had a chance of winning? Over and over again? Have you not wondered why the world never did turn out to be anything close to what you really wanted? For Chrissake man, you never once chose it."
America needs to make its own moral conversion. 57 million idiots got us into this mess without my help, and if they don't change their minds back again without my help we are screwed anyway. Listening to the materialistic, jingoistic, self-adulating crap this convention is serving up is, I'm sorry, not good enough. Of course Nader doesn't have a chance of winning. Of course he is an artifact and would be an absurd president. But his world is the one I want to live in, and not those others. I've removed hope from the equation. America can vote for whatever she wants, as will I. The outcome will be somewhere between sad and catastrophic, but perfectly just.
Interesting. Consider the word "hope". When one hopes, one has already given up and places trust in something other than the self. Placing hope in Obama is a recipe for self-destruction, as is a vote for John McCain. Run Ralph. Run! As for the assumption of a God, that is all it is -- an assumption.
I have trouble imagining the Big Guy using a phrase like, "For Chrissake man..."
But otherwise your point is very well taken.
I've had similar thoughts. As long as Mr. Nader runs, he has my vote.
Why can't mainstream Democrats and so-called "liberals" stand Nader's guts? Because he puts a mirror up to their face and they don't like what they see.
It's Groundhog day, time after time after time: "this election I'm not voting for Nader because it's just too important", "we have to bite our tongues and vote Democratic because the Republicans are just too awful,", etc., etc.
Well, folks, take a look at America today. The Democrats bear most of the responsibility for the Republicanization of American during the Clinton administration, and a good deal of the responsibility for the war crimes, human rights violations, and gutting of our Constitution under the Bush administration, with the eager help of Pelosi, Reid, and crowd.
Until Americans stop casting votes for the "lesser evil", we're going to be forever electing evil leaders.
So sad to see people slamming the only consistently thoughtful, even-keeled, focused, critical candidate (Nader) as an egotist. He is practically a monk, for goodness' sake, devoted to dogging the official party candidates with reminders of what the nation's real issues are.
On the other hand, it is also unfortunate that Nader cannot build a movement but has --for whatever reason-- failed to do so. Is it because third parties in the US are a total waste of time and money?
In any case, in my humble opinion voters should not waste so much time on the presidential candidates and they're better off to concentrate instead on state and local governments and on congress, studying candidates' backgrounds, financial backers, associations and track records.
Then spend some time in private contemplation, blocking out all the repetitious crap from the MSM, to decide whether you want to pull the lever for the neocon fascists to persist and get one or two more nefarious Supremes and a hell of a lot more breaks for the plutocrats, the energy corporations, etc., and a hell of lot more foreign debt, or the closet fascist surrounded by Clinton's cabinet and advisors, the guy who's being promoted to Emperor by the Democratic Party bosses in the guise of "change" and is promising to ship more soldiers to Afghanistan. Or you could register a protest by voting McKinney or Nader or spoiling your ballot.
But don't waste too much time pondering the presidency, and don't neglect your states and counties and cities, where your most immediate influence can bear fruit.
Excuse me but there IS a Nader movement. This movement has 8% support in New Mexico with NO corporate reporting nor coverage. This movement has Nader on 45 state ballots in November. What keeps the movement from getting stronger are people who keep doing the same thing over and over again and thereafter complaining and whining that nothing changes.
.
http://www.nader.org/
Website of Nader's weekly articles he writes. Still does. Very profound I might add...
.
Samson, please tell more about the rally last night. They say there was 4000 people there.
Nannie...
Some of these comments are from people
who sound like many full time professional
anti-Nader pinheads I've heard before. They
aren't all that young, they don't work so
much as talk and type, and they are certain
their own abysmal failures are due to Heroes
stealing the applause or because they think
their own slimy, weak characters are not
obvious.
Being the whiny little snakes they are, the
so-called arguments they present are merely
childish nothings that don't even pass as a
mole hill. Me thinks they are Democrats or
corporate whores. They may entertain
themselves but they sway no one. They are
fakes and charlatans.
And they are not poor, working class folks.
( hint, hint )
Owl Eyes,
You serve up a lot of blatant stupidity for a blind, presumptuous, self-gratifying, 'owl.'
Your post reminded me how the last eight years became the 'toilet era' in American history. Little kids with grownup toys become ground beef for rabid dogs.
Be sure to check under your bed before it gets dark.
You might get 'renditioned.'
Sweet Dreams to
Dimwit.
Wait a minute...Let's see if he, it, starts to wail for mommy's breast.
"Nader Still Follows Cameras?" "Nader is Still a Raider" would have been a more appropriate headline.
Progressives must look at who is funding Obama, and ask themselves, "How can he take Big Corporations' money, and change anything?"
Mame McQueen
"What Was Ralph Nader Thinking?" Read the new biography by Jurgen Vsych http://thewomandirector.com
I happen to have noticed that in recent months there has been little coverage of Nader, either leading up to Nader's planned rally, or his articles in general, on this site. Until now that is, after his rally in Denver.
Meanwhile they've been blabbering up a storm and hemming and hawing away, first about Clinton and Obama, then Biden and Obama, leading all the way up to Obama's big TV moment.
Yawn.
Keep up the Democratic principles, CD.
I don't regret one iota voting for Nader in the past. I would do it again a hundred times over if I could.
I do wholeheartedly regret voting for Lautenberg and Menedez, who have proved they are "business as usual" politicians, helping to enact the patriot act, the military commissions act, and giving the go ahead to big telecom companies to continue wiretapping with no accountability.
Too bad this icon of the left has to go down this road, after all the great things he did in the past.As it is, he's turning into a kind of lefty Harold Stassen.I guess he's just going to keep on running until he drops dead.It's sad, it's sad, it's sad.
but who is going to pick up after he's gone? nobody wants to do the 'dirty' work that nader keeps doing to point out the obvious and it's a sign of our apathetic times... he has to keep up this semi-hopeless fight until people like him can step up to the plate and not be afraid to get pie thrown at their faces and marginalized by the mainsteam media and corrupt politicians.
It would be nice if some of us believed in democracy enough to get off our butt and take over after he is gone.
Kazam!: your wish is granted.
Cynthia McKinney has. And so have thousands of Greens around the country, many of them patiently working their way up the electoral staircase, others slugging along behind the scenes. It isn't easy, being Green.
www.runcynthiarun.org; www.gp.org.
Oregoncharles
Dear New:
Real change certainly does not come from youth in every instance. Youth can only take the lead when it understands the nature of the opponent it seeks to displace. Your support for Obama, regardless of your youth, and your bias towards people on account of their age, indicates that YOU are the old fogey. Ralph Nader could be one hundred years older than he is and still be younger than you, grandpa.
witch1
After 45 year's of being a yellow dog dem. I gave up..With the information on the internet and ability to see how our pretend representative's are voting my choice is with Nader...
I was for Kucinich then Edward's,then Richardson and finelly had to go with Obama...After being on his blog and joining in with the rest of the dem's I watched Obama take a huge leap to the right...105 in the house along with Palosi voted for FISA, 68 in the senate along with Obama voted for FISA...They broke their oath of office to protect the constitution....I will not vote for anyone who vote's against the constitution and people of our country....As far as I am concerned they are not just enabeler's to the bush bunch they are "acting in concert" and just as guilty as the worst administration in our history.
here, here!
Cavedweller is right, the electoral system is broken. Ross Perot proved it in 1992, getting Bill Clinton elected when Perot took some of Bush senior's support. If there were a run off, Bush senior would have won. Same thing in 2000. With a runoff, Gore would have won. Nader didn't screw Gore in 2000. The electoral system screwed the American people then. And the corporate powers that be will make sure the system doesn't change. A baseball game is a fairer process.
BTW, side note to Homeward-Angel. I'm back too. Was a little hesitant with the shakeup at CD. They must have gotten a lot of pressure from those powers that be to change the system and more closely monitor the comments section. Big Brother is watching.
Skippy C, formerly known as Kitty C
Hmmm yeah, well at least I haven't been banned yet for suggesting we ought to have the OPTION to fight back IF non violent protest fails. I wonder how many days this lefty RADICAL will last here this time?
Ralph Nader is TWO YEARS OLDER THAN JOHN MCCAIN.
Yes, he is too old for the job, people.
Wake up!!
Real Change comes from YOUTH!! NOT from OLD FOGIES LIKE RALPH AND JOHN!!
WAKE UP!!
Ralph is an unwitting pawn of the right wing.
He never runs for anything but Prez. Not congress, not governor, not sec of state in Cali. Always Prez. He is too good for the other offices, I guess. And of course, he gets a lot of money, spends a bit and lives off the rest of it, in high style, at the expense of all the losers who donate to his loser campaigns.
VOTE FOR BARACK! VOTE TO WIN!
Really? Ageism serves you, the youth poorly. Just how may I ask is your ignorant vote for another and the SAME corporate lackey, Barack Obanma, going to change anything? You are full of shit when you say, "And of course, he gets a lot of money, spends a bit and lives off the rest of it, in high style, at the expense of all the losers who donate to his loser campaigns." When the black shirted thugs come to haul your ass away you will have plenty of time to reflect upon your vote that kept perpetuating the status quo and the fascist mentality. By the way, Joe Biden is an "old foegy" as you put it. And the man behind Obama is cold warrior and "old fogey" Zbigniew Brzezinski. But I suppose you will have to do a bit more reading to learn about that. Nader is not an "unwitting pawn of the right wing" but Obama is a WILLING puppet of the military industrial complex. Remember that after you get drafted. The empire, after all, will not go down without your participation.
I think you need to have a little more respect for your elders. You disrespect those with more wisdom and knowledge than you.
Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. Respect needs to earned.
Dunderhoof... are you retarded?
There isn't really much more high-minded a retort to such idiotic pretzel logic. What pathetic excuses masquerading as intelligent thought.
It's not the age of the candidate, it's the freshness of the ideas.
And Nader's fresher now than Obama will ever be.
Note the typical low quality & brainlessness of this smear by a Democrat. It's like a 7 yr old on a play ground, engaging in name-calling about "your mama." This idiot claims Nader is "too old," and "lives in high style."
Everyone who knows anything about Nader knows he lives on something like $25k per year. He doesn't even own a car.
Then Mr DunderHead calls Ralph an "unwitting pawn of the right wing." Ironically, that's a great description of the Democratic Party itself (except maybe for the 'unwitting' part, since they serve the rightwing very wittingly).
The stupidity & abysmal quality of this post reflects only on the ignorance of the Democrat who wrote it. It has nothing to do with Nader
Now, tell me what the "real" change Obama is offering. Do you even know what Ralph Nader's supported issues are and his plans to make real changes? You speak the word change as an empty vessel of propaganda without giving it any thought at all.
Real change comes from people with good ideas. It doesn't matter how old you are. Your statement is extremely ignorant and old. Ralph Nader has good ideas and he has a more progressive approach than any politician I've ever heard.
As far as your other ignorant comment on how much money Ralph Nader gets?? Actually I don't even think I need to touch it. What a joke of a statement. You're voting for Obama and are complaining how much people donate to Ralph Nader's campaign.. seriously - get real!
I Don't Get it???
A guy is running for President who has shown that he is knowledgeable, dedicated to the common good, smart, fair minded, prefers peace along with many other qualities and yet most Americans reject him. Looks like you will get who you deserve.
I don't care whether McCain wins either. So long as the "democrats" continue to rubber stamp every reactionary idea the "republicans" have, it doesn't make any difference. Ralph Nader is one of the few truly great individuals on the contemporary political scene, and it is an indicator of how backwards and rightwing this country has become that he is either ignored or becomes the target of rididulous levels of calumny. We are a country that venerates craven behavior, but when someone calls us out on it, as Nader has, he is supposedly the one with an ego problem. What horse manure.
Truly Great?
Ralph? Ralph did some scholarship and some lobbying back in the day, related to consumer safety.
That is it.
Apparently, all people who publish a book and make a public case are great.
I had no idea how much greatness there was in the world...lol!
Of course, Ralph is not great. He is a forgotten footnote in American history.
Yes, the Dems have been hard to love lately due to their capitulations to the repugs. But then, its fine with you if the repugs rule.
Sounds like you have become anti-political.
Believe me, you do care, and you should vote for a win, not for a loser like Ralph the old, old mouth.
You are an idiot.
DunderHoof,
Did you find that 'name' stuck to the back of your dunderhead one morning, after a night of binge drinking and failure to 'score' that contested piece of elephantass your fellow bathtub, fart-sucking friends documented, and that are now blackmailing you?
Your obvious oral fixation and your hilarious stupidity would cause any friendly prankster to predict your behavior. Though there is truth to power when the palm of your hand is mightier than your intellect...
And your manhood's attempt to configure an appendage doesn't end up vestigial, wrinkled and leaking out of YOUR mouth.
I christen thee, thusly, "DipunderBallLessHoofHeadMicroBrain."
A worthy title, indeed, and much sought after for party favors where most Republicans hang out these days.
Boy Scout camps and bus station men's restrooms.
By the way, do you have any documented, national achievement, you know, beyond the one of eating the used toiletpaper of such great intellects as Rush Limburgerdogshitcheese and Billdickinnose O'Rillybigbuttmouthhole? Or had you forgotten that much coveted sculpture Rove gave you that, I heard, was an actual fart casting of his ass in your mouth?
I, truly, mean to elevate your obvious sincerity, great, and well-known, moral turpitude to that of our great POTUS himself. I am sure Rove has personally greased the channels you will follow with him.
We will never forget your dedication and personal sacrifice to power, money and aberrant love for the mouths of 'old' men.
And what exactly is it we are "winning?" The chance for young Americans to be blown up and shot by people who don't want us there in Afghanistan (grave of empires ask the British and Russians) instead of Iraq? The chance to vote for a man who caved on FISA and thus sold out the 4th amendment to the Constitution that the founding fathers fought and died for? The chance to vote for a man funded by Wall St. who thus will be all about letting sub prime lenders off the hook and promoting global trade that leads to exploitation in the third world, increased pollution, and layoffs and declining wages here in the U.S.?
Thanks but no thanks, regardless of which corporate sock puppet gets in there only non violent activism for change will produce substantive change. Hint we got the EPA in the NIXON years because the people demanded it with street protests and Earth day.
Damn well said.
.
Amy Goodman's interview of Ralph Nader this Morning...
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/8/28/ralph_nader_on_the_democrats_corporate
Ralph Nader on the Democrats’ Corporate Ties, the Silencing of Third Parties, and Why Biden is the “MasterCard Senator”
.
A vote for NADER is a vote for real change. The issue now is to get Nader in the debates. Everyone must participate in the Campaign For Open Debates. E-mail C-span, MSNBC, Amy Goodman, ABC, etc, etc. JOIN THE CAMPAIGN TO LET RALPH BE HEARD!
Maybe I can slip this in through the "circle jerk" with out getting any on me.
I cannot vote for Ralph Nader, the stakes are just too high this time. This election truly is "a matter of life and death".
However, one cannot really argue with the substance of what he says (well, you can; but that would be an indication that you might be a bit rigid in your thinking).
It is easy to argue with what Ralph says. You do it the same way you argue with any false, misleading, or hopeless point.
Ralph is two years older than McCain! He is not immortal. His views are not all helpful and they are not all true.
You're just spouting whatever b.s. you feel like making up.
It's flying fast and furious, so true. On the good side, it's refreshing that us left-leaning folk can still get into a knock-down drag-out fight over issues. Conservatives only argue about who's more Fascistic or who loves God more.
Obama's not perfect, but if the choice is (which it does seem to be) him or McCain, I have to hold my nose and vote Obama. This is hardly the time for "statement of principles."
"Obama's not perfect, but if the choice is between him & McCain...."
- This is precisely the kind of dishonest baloney the cowards of the Dem Party always tell themselves. The truth is that not only is Obama "not perfect," he's not progressive in any way, shape or form. He's a neoliberal who represents Wall Street & standard US militarism. His real differences with McCain & Bush are marginal. He will largely follow their program, while camouflaging it a bit better, with prettier language. That's what you're voting for -- more of the same, but with prettier rhetoric.
It's funny, BTW, to see someone like you paying lip service to the delights of a "fight over issues." You're the one whose entire critique of Nader is "He has a big ego." It would be hard to be less "issue-based" than that.
People like you are impossible to please. The sad truth is you're never going to live long enough to see your progressive utopia. Anarchists have been trying to pitch your ideas for generations, it never works. I don't condemn you for trying, but the truth is you have to face up to the fact that you have to work with the materials at hand. Obama isn't perfect, but I have to live in this country too and if I didn't believe that change was still possible and that people like Obama change change for the better, there'd be no reason to continue.
What a statement. "People like us are impossible to please." What exactly is so pleasing about the corporate democrats and republicans. Everything that the Bush administration has done the past 8 years has happened with the support of the Democrats. Your champion of change voted against the Iraq war once and then voted for it every single time after that. I'm definitely not pleased. I'm voting for the person who supports my issues. Because why would you waste your vote on voting for someone who doesn't? You are part of your own problem.
Nader is still more sensible than youngins like Obama.
Nader's brain still works in interviews-but with Obama he stutters and has to carefully think about everything.
Democrats are useless.
Many posters claim that Nader supporters want Obama over McCain. Not true in my case. I fear that Obama is the worser of the two evils. McCain is an old man who will only serve one term. He will be up against a Democratic Congress and can't do much harm.
With a President Obama it will be like it was for Clinton. We are so happy that the Democrat was elected that he gets a honeymoon period to pass all sorts of legislation. Like how Clinton passed NAFTA, the end of welfare as we know it, and the banking deregulations that caused the current economic crisis in our monetary system. The terrible effects of these Clinton laws was not felt at once. It took a few years for all the manufacturing jobs to go off shore.
We are urged by 'Democratic Realists" to vote for Obama because there is nothing worse than a loss by the Democratic party. Well, the worst has already happened. The Democratic party has betrayed the working class people of this nation. They are a corporate party and care for NOTHING over the continued existence of their party and their nice perks from the corporations.
You want an end to the ceaseless wars? Fully funded domestic programs and a chance for a decent life for your kids and grandkids? You want the Constitution to be made whole again after the terrible assaults of both corporate parties in the Bush administration? You must not vote for the two corporate controlled parties.
Nader will not win---but neither will you if you vote corporate. Stand up and vote for what you want. You ain't gonna get nothing if you don't even drop your misplaced loyalty to the two party system that has driven us down to where we are today. Give Nader your vote!!! Is there any part of the platform of Nader/Gonzalez that you fault? Go to www.votenader.org and check it out. Don't heed the paid for hype on the boob tube. Think for your self and vote for what you want!!
I think Pat's analysis is correct. Moreover (measured by his voting record in the Senate) Obama's agenda is far to the right of even Bill Clinton's. Significantly lower wages and benefits (resulting from amnesty for migrants and their neo-slave employers), increased military spending and a unilateral invasion of Pakistan, public funding for a massive expansion of nuclear power (including taking financial responsibility for disasters) --- all of these could become reality with an Obama administration backed by a Democratic Congress.
We need Ralph Nader more than ever.
Why vote for a man who seems to want to upset the establishment only during the elections when you can vote for a party that represents the millions of people who are underpaid, under- or unemployed and under-heard from that is always there? Green Party. Cynthia Mckinney should get our vote this year; Ralph Nader is a great guy - no mistake about it - but his so called "movement" hasn't caught on.
It really is a shame he can't simply endorse the green candidate and maybe run for senate or something less ambitious. No candidate will make it into the debates that are run by the same parties and funded by the same companies that work hard to keep third and independent candidates out. We will continue to splinter the movement if we cannot agree on being either green or whatever party or non-party. Every four years we get promised the same from Nader but are left to pick up the pieces year after year as well. I support the Green Party because it represents an actual movement that can build if people are willing to put in the work, rather than relying on figureheads.
I whole heartedly agree that it is shameful of Nader to run against a green party candidate. Especially one who has so ripe a history of being brutally honest about the vast corruption of the government she was part. McKinney was while in congress making statements about 9/11 that called to question the "official" version. She was pushing for an independent investigation. Then she was harassed by the capital police and lost her seat in the following election. McKinney seems to be as straight a shooter as we're going to get in Washington, that Nader is running against her and spouting only what's already obvious about the corrupt government, highlights how corrupt he has become.
Check this link for verification Nader is under money control:
http://vdare.com/pb/nader.htm
For some sort of "alternative media" commondreams sure doesn't have ANY, not even 1 article about McKinney running as the green candidate, ay? CD=MSM in disguise. CD supporting Nader is more fuel to the fire of Nader's obvious corruption.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
I totally agree with you. Unless Nader runs as a Green again, I won't vote for him.
I vote for a movement, not a candidate.
Jesus Christ man. Look at Nader's accomplishments and the organizations he has started and works with, the legislation attributed to him, the "GREEN" legislation that he is reponsible for. This IS a friggin' movement!
You folks forget that Nader won the popular vote in the Green Party primaries, and was essentially pushed out of the nomination process by our antidemocratic "consensus" process that gives unequal weight to smaller state Green parties, some of which allow REGISTERED DEMOCRATS to belong to the party (where they can sabotage it from within). Even Cynthia McKinney--a worthy candidate even if she was installed as the nominee after getting fewer votes than Nader--has herself bemoaned the "political immaturity" of the party. The Green Party as it is today is well known for its internal bickering and chaos as well as its lack of desire to run a serious campaign. Why else would we schedule our nominating convention so late in the election season? That's why many Greens--myself included, as well as Matt Gonzalez, Nader's running mate--are supporting Nader, even though we wish McKinney well (as does Nader himself, who wants her, as well as Bob Barr, to be included on the presidential debates).
I am aware of these issues, however, last election Nader didn't even show up at the convention.
Isn't there something about him making a promise never to belong to a particular party?
I know of Nader's accomplishments, but I desire to support the Green party as a movement and as a political party, and somehow it seems like this whole Nader thing is dividing the meager voice we have.
I'd be all for the Green Party running Nader, and I think it's stupid that we don't, in the meantime, however, I like voting Green because it gives me a chance to explain what the party is and educate people about its values.
.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
OBAMA TOP CONTRIBUTORS
” You gotta dance with the one who brung ya ”
Read this also...
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/07/hbc-90003343
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/05/america/bundlers.php
.
.
http://www.pr.com/article/1100
Ralph Nader Goes to Washington... Again - The PR.com Interview
By Allison Kugel, Senior Editor - May 14, 2008
Ralph Nader:
We just accept money from individuals, as long as it’s legal. We don’t take money from PACs (Political Action Committees). We don’t take money from commercial interests, which have a quid pro quo, like the oil companies, auto companies and insurance banks. We don’t do that. If people want to contribute, no matter who they are, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative, Republican, Green, whatever… you want to contribute? Welcome. There’s no quid pro quo (a Latin term meaning “something for something”). They see where we stand and they see our issues on the table. You want to contribute? We’re grateful.
.
.
http://www.countercurrents.org/nader300508.htm
What's Really Driving
The High Price Of Oil?
By Ralph Nader 30 May, 2008
[snipit]
Imagine, our government is letting your price for gasoline and home heating oil be determined by a gambling casino on Wall Street called NYMEX. The people need regulatory protection from speculators and an excess profits tax on Big Oil.
In addition, a sane government would see the present price crises as an opportunity to expand our passenger and freight railroad capacity and technology.
A sane government would drop all subsidies and tax loopholes for Big Oil’s huge profits and other fossil fuels and promote a national mission to solarize our economy to achieve major savings from energy conservation technology, retrofitting buildings, and upgrading efficiency standards for motor vehicles, home appliances, industrial engines and electric generating plants.
Those are the permanent ways to achieve energy independence, reduce our trade deficit, create good jobs that can’t be exported and protect the environmental health of people and nature.
Those are the reforms and advances that a muscular consumer, worker and small business revolt can focus on in the coming weeks.
What say you, America?
.
and people complain that J McCain is tooooooooo old? Get real. Nader looks like the crypt keeper. I love the mans commitment to the cause, but after he dies who will pick up the cause? It's time to start thinking about such things folks. The man is not immortal, though the cause may be!
Ahah! Progressives for ageism, eh?
At first when I saw there was (finally) an article about Nader, I was overjoyed.
When I actually saw it, I was shocked. A HORRIBLE article! In fact, I have never seen a worse one.
I think it's probably been a year or more since we've had any articles actually written by Nader. They used to appear occasionally.
A sizable portion of the regulars here are Nader supporters. It seems we are being invited to leave.
CommonDreams has been my Home Page for 7 years. Not any more.
So then, a happy "progressive" family only when progressives follow the Party line? How true to form. Click boots and comply.