As long as we're discussing Ralph Nader...

[DroppinScience]

Here's an article of his latest efforts to offer alternatives at the conventions (and yes, he's doing the same for the GOP convention too).

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/08/28-10

Published on Thursday, August 28, 2008 by The Hartford Courant
Nader Still Follows Cameras, Proudly Offers Alternative

by Jesse A. Hamilton

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.

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."

Enjoy.

[ericg]

dope. word up

[yeahwho]

His statements on poor people are just that, statements. A very rudimentary search on the internet will find multiple speaking points on the democratic stance on poverty, healthcare and struggling Americans.

I do not see how his poverty discussions are anymore onpoint than Obama's. In fact he knows well enough to not put that line of bullshit on his website (http://www.votenader.org/issues/).

I respect Ralph, what I really wish he would focus 100% on is debates, if the democrats and republicans could be forced to open up the presidential debates then fresh ideas would be heard by the masses.

This is more of a financial movement against the major networks, which would take a huge undertaking. He could do it if he wasn't so wrapped up in all issues.

[saz]

yeah, he's wrapped up in the issues because that's what MATTERS.

and his statements on poor people are just "statements"? wtf? dude you can't be serious. does obama support a massive increase in the minimum wage to a liveable wage? nader champions this issue:

Seven Point Plan to End Poverty in the United States:

As the wealthiest country in the world, with high productivity per capita, a country that produces an abundance of capital, credit, technology and food, we can end poverty. Yet, according to the Bureau of the Census, poverty and hunger for children and adults is increasing rather than decreasing -- 34.6 million Americans lived in deep poverty, 12.1% of the U.S. population. Many millions of Americans live in what is called 'near poverty' by the Labor Department. We must make ending poverty a priority and weave that goal into a network of policies:


Truly Progressive Taxation
An End to huge Corporate Subsidies and Military Budget Waste
Job Creation
Equal Pay for Women
Child-Care
Living Wages for All Workers
Restore the critical Social Safety Net

http://www.votenader.org/issues/fiscal/poverty/



nader/gonzalez '08 baby (y)

[yeahwho]

yeah, he's wrapped up in the issues because that's what MATTERS.

and his statements on poor people are just "statements"? wtf? dude you can't be serious. does obama support a massive increase in the minimum wage to a liveable wage? nader champions this issue:

The Global Poverty Act (http://obama.senate.gov/press/080213-obama_hagel_can_1/), a controversial bill Obama introduced to the Senate last December passed without much fanfare, seems to have completely passed right over Ralph Nader's head.

I'm sure Ralph's ideas are so good he forgot to actually check what bill's in senate that have already passed Senator Obama's name are attached to.

[saz]

The Global Poverty Act:

Declares it official U.S. policy to promote the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme global poverty in half by 2015.

Requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to carry out that policy.

Includes guidelines for what the strategy should include - from aid, trade, and debt relief, to working with the international community, businesses and NGOs, to ensuring environmental sustainability.

Requires that the President's strategy include specific and measurable goals, efforts to be undertaken, benchmarks, and timetables.

Requires the President to report back to Congress on progress made in the implementation of the global poverty strategy.


first, this legislation deals with global poverty, not american domestic poverty.

second, you actually think that nader would be unaware of poverty legislation? come on, you know better than that. that would be like accusing kucinich of being aloof of anti-poverty legislation.

anyways, lets just see how far this legislation goes, if it is indeed carried out or goes anywhere for that matter. because hey afterall, we all know how much bill clinton did for the working class and poor during his administration: nafta (and subsequent outsourcing of jobs), cutting welfare etc.

but of course most importantly, i can't take obama, a centrist, very seriously at all in terms of being an economic populist, nor striving for social justice and fighting poverty when he appoints walmart clown and social security privatization advocate jason furman (http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/11/nation/na-furman11) as his chief economic advisor.

[yeahwho]

[B]


first, this legislation deals with global poverty, not american domestic poverty.

second, you actually think that nader would be unaware of poverty legislation? come on, you know better than that. that would be like accusing kucinich of being aloof of anti-poverty legislation.

So Nader who has actually accomplished 0 bills in the House or Senate to deal with poverty is all of a sudden much more able to contend with poverty than Obama?

You say,
i can't take obama, a centrist, very seriously at all in terms of being an economic populist

Yet Ralph Nader has "No Record" of any actual legislation on poverty. He is a consumer advocate, not a politician. He is in over his head and thankfully the majority of US citizens realize this. If he could just humble himself to realize that you must at least try and be an effective councilman or mayor before becoming "Commander in Chief", maybe then he would garner political respect from his fellow citizens.

I know you really like Ralph Nader as a candidate and you think he'll be better at social justice in America, but it's much much more than that involved here. I honestly don't think he would know how to handle all of the agencies he's criticized his entire life. It would become FUBAR and gridlocked so fast in Washington the small guy would suffer more than ever.

[ericg]

not a politician in today's terms? count him in.
the man embodies national/ global economic relief. give me a break.
he'd find his place.

[saz]

you are actually comparing obama's miniscule record to nader's vast accomplishments? (http://www.draftnader.org/accomplishments.php) that's ridiculous. damn straight nader is much more able to contend with poverty than obama.

no, the majority of american citizens don't realize that he is over his head. you are just making an assumption. you of all people know and realize just how much coverage independent candidates, whether they be green or libertarian, receive from the corporate media: ZERO. and no, anyone who wants to run for president should have that right. i thought america was supposed to be a democracy. i'm sick and tired of that ridiculous, condescending attitude from democrats, ie how dare he or anyone else run for the presidency on a progessive/populist platform, how dare there be a third party vying for votes.

he wouldn't know how to handle all of the agencies he's criticized his entire life? well, not only is nader a princeton and harvard educated lawyer, but also and more importantly, if he has been criticizing all of these agencies his entire life, which he has been doing, than certainly he has a vast knowledge of them.

the bottom line is that you're not only making assumptions, but you're also being hostile, abrasive and defensive (which is completely unnecessary), because heaven forbid someone dare criticize barack obama, and/or discuss a different candidate or platform.

[yeahwho]

you are actually comparing obama's miniscule record to nader's vast accomplishments? (http://www.draftnader.org/accomplishments.php) that's ridiculous. damn straight nader is much more able to contend with poverty than obama.

no, the majority of american citizens don't realize that he is over his head. you are just making an assumption. you of all people know and realize just how much coverage independent candidates, whether they be green or libertarian, receive from the corporate media: ZERO. and no, anyone who wants to run for president should have that right. i thought america was supposed to be a democracy. i'm sick and tired of that ridiculous, condescending attitude from democrats, ie how dare he or anyone else run for the presidency on a progessive/populist platform, how dare there be a third party vying for votes.

he wouldn't know how to handle all of the agencies he's criticized his entire life? well, not only is nader a princeton and harvard educated lawyer, but also and more importantly, if he has been criticizing all of these agencies his entire life, which he has been doing, than certainly he has a vast knowledge of them.

the bottom line is that you're not only making assumptions, but you're also being hostile, abrasive and defensive (which is completely unnecessary), because heaven forbid someone dare criticize barack obama, and/or discuss a different candidate or platform.

Dude I'm being realistic, not hostile. Everybody has criticized Barack Obama, it hasn't changed anything with me. I'm still supporting him. I could easily find at least 20 of your criticisms of Obama with the click of the search button. That's just you, I've been hearing shit about Obama all year on here. God Forbid. :rolleyes:

Going to Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Oxford, MIT or any other major school does not automatically give a person the ability to represent and make laws on how my family lives. I'll need a little bit more, more than successful consumer advocate. Nader does not play well with corporate America which is admirable, but fucking ridiculous for any sort of working relationship. Wall Street is not going to tolerate his socialist tendacies and neither are most of the posters on this board.

Ralph Nader is a good man. This is not his year. Very bright intelligent people are not backing Ralph Nader. I'm sorry that is happening but we've been fucked here in the US the past 8 years. Before then things were actually pretty good.

[saz]

no, you were being hostile, and you still are through your constant attempts at ridicule. no one else feels threatened by discussing nader and his platform but yourself. you immediately jumped in this thread and have been condescending as hell. and yes, everyone knows you're supporting obama.

you missed the point. i reference nader's academic background because he is a highly intelligent man, a brilliant man, and highly skilled lawyer. he knows how politics work, how to play the game, and how to handle and stand up to the washington insiders. nader has not only been testifying before the congress for decades, but has also been working alongside congressman and senators for decades. he has vast and very unique experience.

well, corporate america, despite attempting to instigate a fascist coup (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=fascist+coup+fdr&meta=), dealt with, tolerated and worked alongside fdr. they also worked with teddy roosevelt, harry truman, and even lbj. and i don't see anyone else getting in a bit of a tiff because someone else is discussing different candidates and their respective platforms.

what is also incredibly perplexing is that you have claimed to be a "kucinich democrat" and that you "love" nader, but meanwhile you've just admitted that you will not tolerate socialism.

"very bright intelligent people are not backing ralph nader". again, more outrageous assumptions. i suppose then the millions of americans who are currently supporting nader are not very bright nor intelligent? that is so incredibly naive and absurd. that is probably the most patronizing remark i've read on here.

oh and under clinton, not only was welfare being cut, the defence of marriage act signed, nafta implemented with the outsourcing of millions of manufacturing jobs, but also millions of americans were living without health insurance, with thousands dying annually because they didn't have health insurance. so even eight years ago, things still weren't that good.

[yeahwho]

no, you were being hostile, and you still are through your constant attempts at ridicule. no one else feels threatened by discussing nader and his platform but yourself. you immediately jumped in this thread and have been condescending as hell. and yes, everyone knows you're supporting obama.

you missed the point. i reference nader's academic background because he is a highly intelligent man, a brilliant man, and highly skilled lawyer. he knows how politics work, how to play the game, and how to handle and stand up to the washington insiders. nader has not only been testifying before the congress for decades, but has also been working alongside congressman and senators for decades. he has vast and very unique experience.

well, corporate america, despite attempting to instigate a fascist coup (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=fascist+coup+fdr&meta=), dealt with, tolerated and worked alongside fdr. they also worked with teddy roosevelt, harry truman, and even lbj. and i don't see anyone else getting in a bit of a tiff because someone else is discussing different candidates and their respective platforms.

what is also incredibly perplexing is that you have claimed to be a "kucinich democrat" and that you "love" nader, but meanwhile you've just admitted that you will not tolerate socialism.

"very bright intelligent people are not backing ralph nader". again, more outrageous assumptions. i suppose then the millions of americans who are currently supporting nader are not very bright nor intelligent? that is so incredibly naive and absurd. that is probably the most patronizing remark i've read on here.

oh and under clinton, not only was welfare being cut, the defence of marriage act signed, nafta implemented with the outsourcing of millions of manufacturing jobs, but also millions of americans were living without health insurance, with thousands dying annually because they didn't have health insurance. so even eight years ago, things still weren't that good.

Do you like Barack Obama? I actually have gone out of my way to let you know I like Ralph Nader.

Hostility? I also completely agree with Nader that he should be allowed to debate.

At what point does it dawn on you I'm just responding to your thread and not being hostile? Clinton did a fine job and this Country was in fantastic financial shape at the end of his term.

[saz]

i think obama is just another bland centrist, who will maintain the establishment status quo. i don't think he will do anything outrageous like start another stupid, illegal war. i know that an obama administration will not appoint fervent conservative judges to the supreme court, and that roe v. wade will not be overturned.

the hostility is quite apparent when you ridicule nader and his supporters. again, your remarks, ie "very bright intelligent people are not backing ralph nader", were simply outrageous and unnecessary. you can vehemently disagree all you like, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but ridiculing to that extent and even getting a little personal is not necessary.

[Bob]

the hostility is quite apparent when you ridicule nader and his supporters. again, your remarks, ie "very bright intelligent people are not backing ralph nader", were simply outrageous and unnecessary. you can vehemently disagree all you like, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but ridiculing to that extent and even getting a little personal is not necessary.

i read that more as "there are intelligent people that are not supporting ralph nader" and less as "people who support ralph nader are not intelligent". in other words, it wasn't so much an insult towards nader supporters, it was more meant to say that even intelligent people are backing obama or...i dunno maybe i'm wrong, but i didn't really read it as an insult to nader supporters. it leaves open the possibility that very bright and intelligent people are supporting nader too

[ericg]

( :
shut the fuck up

[Bob]

lol oh no the craziest asshole on the board doesn't like me

[ericg]

it's not that. you inadvertantly prove my points all the time. thanx
anyway, i bet ralph's iq is a lot higher than anyone else running.

[Bob]

"why can't we be friends" - war

[yeahwho]

the hostility is quite apparent when you ridicule nader and his supporters. again, your remarks, ie "very bright intelligent people are not backing ralph nader", were simply outrageous and unnecessary. you can vehemently disagree all you like, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but ridiculing to that extent and even getting a little personal is not necessary.

At this point I'm completely lost. Your making 0 sense. I never once have said what your accusing me of saying. I've always admired Ralph Nader and have never insulted you, him or any of his supporters in this thread. That is twisted, you insult "Global Poverty Act" I take it in stride then you start some fight as if I'm attacking you.

It is quite the opposite and I really don't give a shit if you apologize to me for calling Obama a corporate stooge. Or an Obamatron or any of the other bullshit I hear everyday from multiple posters on this board.

The fact of my statement is this, I consider some of the brightest political minds I know both personally and in the public eye are supporting Barack Obama.

It's my vote, it's my country too and you know what? As an individual it's my right to speak as freely as I like and not be bullied into some sort of submissiveness by a lack of reading comprehension.

If I was going to be hostile you would figure it out when instead of saying "I like Ralph Nader" I would say "I don't like Ralph Nader".

Are you baiting, trolling or just trying to start hostilities? Because I'm becoming pretty sick and tired of being your punching bag.

[Bob]

it's not that. you inadvertantly prove my points all the time. thanx
anyway, i bet ralph's iq is a lot higher than anyone else running.

a) you have points?
b) did you seriously come back to this post 2 hours later to edit it without even changing the meaning? "come on" -MAD TV

[ericg]

ouch. one for bob. zero for ericg. i'm bored. so what?

[King PSYZ]

hell, I didn't even know we were discussing Ralph Nader...:confused::eek:

[ericg]

cha heard right

[ericg]

www.votenader.org

[saz]

yeah, i'm making zero sense by pointing out your patronizing attitude: "very bright intelligent people are not backing ralph nader" :rolleyes:

and i insulted the global poverty act? how? by pointing out that it addresses international poverty and not domestic poverty? by asking if the legislation will be carried out and if it goes anywhere?

i have criticized obama for his centrist/corporate leanings, ditto his cop out on fisa. those are legitimate criticisms, which obama supporters themselves are not comfortable with. however, i'm not going to call you anything because i don't hurl insults, nor do i bully. and i don't pick on you nor jump all over obama for no reason and troll like some others do on here, and you know it.