Letters to the Editor
-
The self-righteousness of Nader bashers makes me want to join his campaign
The only reason I do not want to support Nader this year is because I believe the Green Party needs to start backing younger candidates for future elections. I will be campaigning for Cynthia McKinney if we are able to secure her Green Party nomination. Unfortunately Ralph has the draft vote from the Greens (as well as Pace and Freedom) so it's very likely he will be our candidate again (despite rather ignorant posts made here stating that Nader could not get the Green nomination, he has consistently polled well in the majority as the Presidential candidate of choice for the last 8 years).
I'll put my hand up for the Troll who asked who still thinks there would be no difference between Gore and Bush. Apparently there's a lot of cognitive dissonance between the folks who forgot that Gore was a reactionary Southern Baptist till 2004 and his running mate happened to be politically to the right of our current commander-in-chief. We'd have a VP today who not only thinks we should bomb Iran, but has thought so for the past 40 years. In case the story hasn't percolated now, Al Gore was the principle agitator for the program of Extraordinary Renditions in the Clinton white house (you can read about that subject here at Salon), as well as a big supporter of the first Gulf War as well as Desert Fox.
The fact that Gore not being president was not able to go warmongering across the globe, nor expand Clinton's wiretapping programs is not evidence that he would not have continued the policies that defined him as a candidate for higher office for the previous eight years.
-
Oh no, not again!
When will that idiot learn that he only splits the vote. Thank him for the past 4 years of the Bushman. He should pay for the losses, maybe that will deter him from doing the same stupid thing again.
-
Flaccid
Nader's life has moved into that long goodbye that ends with a whine. He has become a mere memory of the crusader who used to matter. Now he is running as the beast who imposed eight years of Bush on us, who led to the war, who made the destruction of New Orleans all but a certainty. He is a sad and miserable man.
-
No Troll Here
If the post referring to the "Troll" was refering to my letter, sorry to disappoint, but I'm most decidedly not a troll (as any persual of previous comments, my blog, etc., would indicate).
Saying Gore wasn't progressive enough is not the same as saying there was no difference between Bush and Gore in 2000. Even if one grants that Gore has moved dramatically to the left since 2004 (a questionable assertion at best), the notion that he was a "reactionary Soutern Baptist" is hyperbole with little, if any, grounds in reality. The fact remains that Gore would not have pursued the policies Bush has, and anyone with eyes to see could have made that assertion in 2000.
I'd much rather have had a more thoroughly progressive candidate in 2000 from within the Democratic party too; what I refused to do was vote for a spoiler rather than vote for the candidate who was clearly the best of two choices.
-
YIPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, - - - - if only those other two Clods would bow out and hele it on outta town, toute suite, then perhaps the first steps could begin in scrubbing clean the filth & garbage that the Democrat & Republicans have polluted our government and nation's capital with.
Ralph Nader has lived & worked in Washington nearly his entire life --- and none know as well as he where ALL the bodies have been buried.
Having first cast the first of my numerous votes for Nader in 1972 I can tell you that his overriding Message in all these years is that BOTH parties are covered with the Slime of Money. Money rules America --- the Clinton $$$ Story has been exposed & retold ad nauseum since his departure --- Now Bubba, that guy, he really takes the Cake.
Yet the Well Meaning Bubble-Heads of the Left continue to go all gushy & ga-ga over the Clown in a most adolescent way --- not unlike Right Wing Buccaneers toward our present-day Moron-in-Chief.
Barry OBlarney for President ?? --- the guy's a two-term state senator --- and he's suppose to be qualified to take charge of the most powerful government in human history ?? He knows not Washington, let alone the World. Ralph, meanwhile, understands Congress completely.
The problem is not that Ralph is running, the problem is that Salon et al & millions of others don't vote for the most qualified man now running for the office.
But the Dupes of the Democratic Party will get suckered again, perhaps even loosing in November --- Why ?? ---- because they lost their way. They fell before the almighty corrupt dollar, pretending their innocence in the equation, while Sucking the Teat of the Hog.
-
argh
Will the Democratic Party never learn?? I just watched Tad Devine on CNN say the strategy to deal with the Nader campaign is to just "ignore it".
Yep, that's the ticket...why bother with trying to appease the protest vote on the left? Much better to ignore them, then blame Nader if things don't work out in November.
That sure worked out in 2000 didn't it?
(man, the dems better hope Nader doesn't get some traction in this election...'cause he's saying alot of things that could resonate with progressives. Things could get sticky come September)
-
So Where Was Ralph in January?
Fine, so, he's running again. Not particularly worried, since his effect in 2004 was negligible. That was before the Hurricane Katrina fiasco, and before the country REALLY went sour on Iraq AND on Bush, so I expect the "Nader Effect" to be even tinier and less consequential, in this cycle. But we're being asked to believe it's NOT egotistical grandstanding that Nader waited until there were only a few primaries left to enter the race with a "Look at ME!" Splash? Yeah, Right!
Frankly, Nader's like an athlete who insists he should be allowed to join a marathon at the thirteen mile mark, then can't figure out why the REAL contestants, who were there at the starting line for the Iowa Caucus in January and before are furious with him! Were Nader willing to start where and when every other candidate did and a demonstrated a willingness to try to win people's votes with the same grunt-work campaigning that ALL the other candidates have had to do, I might not like him any better, or vote for him, but I wouldn't contest his right to run every Election cycle. (Oh wait, maybe starting a campaign when the others do would require more money than "Mr. I'm so pure" can raise.) My objection is not because I don't think Nader has valid issues to bring up, I do. I also believe Kucinich has valid issues, but I'm more willing to listen to Kucinich because he DOES join the race before the Iowa and New Hampshire contests and puts the same work into his run that all other candidates do. When Nader enters the race almost at the end of Primary Season, I DO question his motives and whether he deserves the courtesy of being invited to debate with candidates who had to work a lot harder and a lot longer for their party's nominations than he was willing to do.
Just one more thing--I really can't stand Nader's moralistic finger-wagging "I'm doing this for your own good" lecture mentality. For that reason alone, I'd never vote for him. I voted against Dubya in 2000 because I genuinely believed he would be a terrible president. And he has exceeded my worst fears. No matter how low my expectations and opinion of him, Bush has always managed to tunnel under them. An election year is long--two terms of a lousy president is far longer, and the cost to our country has been disastrous. Sorry Ralph, it really DOES matter who wins.