Since 1996 Ralph Nader has run for president of the United States not to win but to inject into the campaigns social values too long missing from the Democratic candidates policies and platforms. Last week Ralph Nader opened an exploratory campaign for the 2008 presidential election.
In every presidential election cycle since 1996 I have supported Nader because I too believe that there are major social justice values that have been abandoned by the Democratic leadership, under the control of the right-wing Democratic Leadership Council and the Jim Crow Clinton dynasty. And in each election I have tried hard to get the Democrats to understand why Nader runs and why I support him.
I have also articulated what I believe is the solution to this division. Simply put if the Democratic leaders should meet with Nader. They should try to find a common ground with him. Demonstrate respect for and themselves reflect the social justice, human rights and civil liberties that he articulates, that this division could be mended and the Democratic Party would then have, within its ranks, a large contingent of dedicated social justice political ACTIVISTS who live and campaign for their values. Activists, a powerful weapon in any campaign.
So once again I am making the same plea that I have made in every presidential cycle since 1996, that the Democratic leaders meet with and recognize the valid and vitally important issues that Ralph Nader brings to the table.
In 1996 Clinton snubbed Nader.
In 2000 Gore Snubbed Nader.
In 2004 Kerry snubbed Nader.
Will Barack Obama be a consistent Democrat and snub Nader in 2008? Or will Obama truly try to be different from the DLC pack and bring Nader into his campaign by meeting with him and by trying to understand and respect the issues that Nader brings to the table?
Actually, I choose both 1 & 4. The democratic nominee should talk to Nader, but s/he won’t.
LOL!
My sentiments precisely.
I’d like to see the Democratic candidate meet with a represetative(s) of the the Green Party, but meeting with Nader, not so much. Frankly, I wouldn’t trust Nader as far as I could throw him, going way back to his Unsafe At Any Speed days.
LOL!
“Fear will keep the local systems in line.”
You need to learn to read for comprehension the things that you yourself write.
“Frankly, I wouldn’t trust Nader as far as I could throw him…”
Talk about (irrational) fear controlling someone.
I’ve no great fondness for GM, but manipulating evidence regarding the Chevrolet Corvair hardly qualifies as an irrational fear.
is nothing more than fear-mongering.
Obviously you’re unfamiliar with that entire transaction. “Unsubstantiated allegations” need not remain so with google readily available. But perhaps your great affection for Mr.Nader has blinded you.
Since you may simply not be posessed of sufficient technical skills to do the research, here is at least a start, but certainly far from the full extant of relevant information. You will need to read down a bit. Recognize that the full task of research about this issue would take considerable time. Included relevant information would require the films that Nader used to “prove” his assertions about the Corvair, in which the driver is clearly seen to be making multiple unnecessary movements.
His assertions are far from universally accepted, something of which you may not be aware.
I’d sure as heck snub Nader.
He’s an asshole, who treats his volunteers like s__t. I’ve heard first-hand stories re this.
Nader is all about Nader. He bought into his own so-called godliness years ago and still lives by it.
He did some good work in his early years, but it went permanently to his head.
I have worked for Nader and that assertion is a load of crap. Pure and simple.
Beside the fact that that personal attack on the man has NOTHING to do with the issues that attack Americans, like me, to support him.
Its not about personalities its about national and public policies.
Personal attacks on Nader is nothing more than right-wing Democratic demagoguery. Its the kind of trash tactic that has bolstered my contempt for the Democratic Party of the past twenty-years.
You thugs don’t want to WIN the support of Nader voters. All you want to do is force us to capitulate to your dominance and slaver mentality.
Beside the fact that that personal attack on the man has NOTHING to do with the issues that attract Americans, like me, to support him.
Let’s see. I make a comment above, you make a joke out of it vis-a-vis my sig line and then essentially call me a liar. (with respect to his less than forthright career building work about the Corvair.)
Then you dismiss Lisa’s direct concerns about him and indicate that you want a discussion about issues.
Are you serious? The LOL is now directed at you. Blind hero worship is truly an ugly thing.
If you want to attack the man as a way of avoiding the topic of the thread then you do the research. Post it and YOU stand by it and defend it. Until YOU substantiate YOUR slanders they are nothing more than slanders.
Don’t expect me to do your research.
You have “slandered” me now several times within this silly post. You’ve called my statements unsubstantiated without knowing the truth or lack thereof. I won’t do the research for you. Lisa’s statements apparently require none. Hero worship is a sad substitute for substantive political discourse, as is demonstrated here.
The word troll does come to mind upon reading your repsonses here.
Grow up and discuss the issues rather than this incessant effort to divert from the issues with personal crap.
You can’t defend your Democrat partisan anti-Nader hate so you come here and distract from the issues with attacks.
It has never been about Nader. Its about the issues that he brings to the table. You right-wing Democrats don’t want anyone to talk about social justice issues that you are on the right-wing side of so you attack Nader and anyone who mentions him. And you do it in personal attack terms. then when people respond in kind you attack them for that. fuck man you folks are experts at running everyone around in circles that evade the ISSUES.
Kiss off demagogue.
LOL! Proving my point. See below.
Ah yes. If you don’t worship Mr.Nader,you are the enemy and on the wrong side of the issues, whatever those might be. (The diarist doesn’t say what they are.) You can’t have honest concerns about Nader’s credibility, notwithstanding longstanding documentation regarding same. Agree or you are the enemy. Sounds like a lot like Bushco , no?
Barack Obama quotes Kennedy about a strong leader being able to speak with opponents. I advocated that Obama NEUTRALIZE Nader by meeting with him and finding common ground. How am I expressing Nader worship if I am recommending ways to neutralize him.
You have done nothing but call for more right-wing division and hate within the Democratic Party. You are the one who blindly supports the right-wing hegemony of the Democratic leadership and continuation of the divisive anti democratic cult of contempt for Nader and his supporters. YOU ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE ACCUSING ME OF DOING.
Transference is a sign of a psychiatric disorder. Get help!
You don’t know the first thing about me though you pretend to. Because I believe that Nader isn’t worth bothering with I am supporting the “right-wing hegemony” of the party? Nader is an individual that has built his career on fictions, a cause for concern for anyone. Why legitimize him? If the Greens actually put forth someone of any worth, I might feel differently. As it stands, you will note my above comment, the one you laughed at, that indicated I believe meeting with representatives of the Green Pary a worhtwhile pursuit. Meeting with Nader, not so much. But it’s likely that you’ll read some dark motives into these words also. Since I’ve been here almost from the start of this blog, you might want to take 3 seconds to catch up on ancient history before characterizing my motives.
If Obama gets the nod and Nader announces a run anyway it’s a bit clear Nader is more about Nader than anything else.
Obama worked the streets of my city and lived in my neighborhood eschewing a lucrative legal career to be an activist. That’s not a guy to worry about. HRC on the other hand seems to think things run from the top down rather than the bottom up. Though I still think Nader would be a fool to run again if HRC got the nomination (clearly Gore & Kerry were substantially different from Bush) he’d at least have a better argument about why he feels the need to inject certain issues into the race.
I don’t agree at all.
If Nader is in the general election it will be because the Democratic nominee does not reflect or respect the social justice related issues that Nader brings to the campaign.
I have said, for a dozen years now, that the Democrats could easily neutralize Nader by recognizing the issues that he promotes. Not just the usual vague lip service but real knowledgeable empathy for these social justice issues. The Democratic candidates since 1996 have not been willing to do this, to their own political detriment.
Whether or not Nader is in the race I will never again vote for a drug war supporting politician for president or congress. I have made this moral commitment since 1995 and I will carry it to my grave.
Obama and Clinton both support the Jim Crow war on drugs. Nader could talk some sense into them on this issue. So far Clinton and Obama just say no.
I just say no to drug warrior politicians.