Ralph Nader, cranky and California-bound

[AlphaCentauri]

Source: LA Times

Presidential candidate Ralph Nader -- yes, he's still running -- is unhappy that he's been denied a voice at Friday's first presidential debate at the University of Mississippi. So starting hours before the match-up, he and vice presidential running mate Matt Gonzalez will campaign in Los Angeles and along the California coast to decry "the unjust, restrictive, and undemocratic Commission on Presidential Debates."

According to the California Peace and Freedom Party nominee, who expects to be on the ballot in at least 45 states:

"The CPD, a corporation headed since its inception by two former chairs of the Democratic and Republican parties, shuts third-party candidates away from public view, maintaining a stranglehold on the two-party system and stifling the political conversation in this country."

For the record, Bob Barr's people aren't happy with the CPD either.



Read more: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/ralph-nader.html

---

excluding candidates from the debates doesn't do good for democracy.

Nader and Barr should be in the debates.

[liberalhistorian]

1. Fuck him and the horse he rode

in on from here to Sunday. If it weren't for his lying, egotistical ass we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. Why the hell can't he just GO THE HELL AWAY!

[AlphaCentauri]

2. Blaming everybody else is part of our culture or what?

Why we don't assume responsibility and admit that in the 2000 election we just did sit down and watch how the supreme court decided the election, were where those massive manifestations of the voter who saw their election stolen? no where, everybody just played along with the game.

[bitchkitty]

10. The election was stolen.

I have come to believe that they would have stolen it without Nader. Bush did it, not Nader.

That said, I don't like him either. Too much ego.

[depakid]

13. That was impressive

It took all of how many seconds for someone calling themselves both liberal and a historian to denounce Nader and show that they were niether a liberal nor a histortian.

Wow.

[clixtox]

14. Sad, or hilarious for the cynical, post! Sniffing that oxymoron gas too much!

Ralph Nader isn't controlled, or even influenced, by corporate, or super/uber-rich oligarchs. That's his problem, to put it succinctly!

We can only hope that Ralph Nader is just way too far ahead of his time to be appreciated by the ignorant, or corporate toadies, conscious or ingenuous!

Perhaps the recent events which put the fascist underpinnings of our economic system under a microscope, rather than the usual fare of the antics of witless celebrities, will be illuminating enough hopefully to expose what is/has been happening to enough of us.

The wheels are coming off of the phony economy and the fascist political duopoly of the the major parties. This is the one time every four years when our elected masters might actually not completely screw us, or not!


History will recognize Ralph Nader as one of the few honest, selfless politicians of our era.

Ralph Nader's career certainly compares favorably to any other current player on the national political scene, IMHO!

Think about that for a few minutes.

This is important, try to think about this for a few more minutes before proceeding.



Any honest, informed observer of the 2000 election, and it's transparently corrupt conclusion, realizes that Nader's candidacy, or campaign activities, had absolutely nothing to do with Al Gore losing, or Shrub/SCOTUSA stealing it from the somnambulant Democrats.

Tragically the Democratic Party would prefer to continue to "blame" Nader for their horrible 2000 campaign effort and precipitous capitulation.

Not much has changed on the capitulation front among our Democrats in charge during the last 8 (or even 30) years.

So sad!

We certainly can not blame Nader for that either.

Remember what is "off the table" and watch what happens this week when the corporations and the super/uber rich attempt to get "bailed out".

Ironic that we have to rely on Barney Frank to represent us this week, another true political hero of our times.

There are precious few others, way too few... Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and just a few dozen more in the H.R.

[SILVER__FOX52]

3. I haven't forgiven him for

Florida 2000 yet.

[LeFleur1]

4. Nadar didn't steal Florida's votes

Stop blaming Nadar.

[salguine]

7. THANK YOU.

[AndyTiedye]

8. Nader Was Working to Throw the Election to Bush**. He Made it Close Enough to Steal

I'm not gonna stop blaming him any time soon.

In every swing state where Gore needed just a few more votes to beat Bush, there was Nader, campaigning against him.
At the same time Nader insulted our intelligence by saying he was just trying to get to 5% for funding.
If he were trying to do that, he would have been campaigning in California and New York, not in the small swing states.
How stupid does he think we are?

[Quantess]

11. The Republican Party gave Nader a lot of money.

Republicans are arguably his largest fan base.

[liberalhistorian]

30. Exactly, thank you!

I'm not so sure anymore that he didn't want Bush to win.

[patriotvoice]

21. "Nadar" -- NADAR: NAder Detection And Ranging?

First cousin of RADAR and MIDAR, second cousin once removed of SONAR?

[liberalhistorian]

23. He knew how critical every vote was and

didn't care. In fact, he said there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. Yeah, how's that workin' for us now? The election may have been stolen and the SCOTUS may have installed *, but it would have been a lot harder without Nader having run in the states where he KNEW it would be close and he KNEW there'd be a potential problem. He didn't care and put his own ego and arrogance ahead of everything else.

[AlphaCentauri]

26. and Bush was re-elected 4 years ago, Naders fault again?

defeat the contender with ideas not assumptions

[liberalhistorian]

27. Why did he have republican

support? Why did he have repub contributors providing a substantial amount of funding for his campaigns? Now why would that possibly be? Hmmmmmmm................

[AlphaCentauri]

29. that's how the system is setup, the other parties can get obscene amounts of money with out question

and we prefer to attack the little guy in concert with the right instead of promoting a true democracy where other parties could have the same opportunity of governing.

[AlphaCentauri]

6. Gore gave up too soon

[Indenturedebtor]

5. I know Barr and he seems like a fine upstanding individual. Who is this Nader guy again? n/t

[2Design]

9. if he did anything in between for people it might even be viable

but he does nothing -

[EFerrari]

18. And you know that how?

[shrike]

24. I'd like to know that, too

What does Ralph do with himself, once an elections is over with and he has four years to kill?

That's a sincere question; I might have a higher opinion of the guy if I got good reports of what he does in his down time.

[silverojo]

12. Screw Nader!

Debates are for viable candidates, nimrod. Go home and shut up like all the other wacko candidates have to.

[clixtox]

16. Nader is 100X more "viable", in every sense, than McLamebrain!

Maybe its what Nader might say that makes him unqualified to participate.

Perhaps our masters running the 2 major political parties don't want to shift the focus to the real issues that should be debated.

Whatever the purported, or actual, reason might be, it sure isn't very democratic!

Nader would have exposed Bush as a not-so-facile tool, and a ignorant fool, in the 2000 debates and changed the outcome, IMHO.

Barack Obama won't need any help to squash McLamebrain.

Bush debated Gore to a tie, or at least close enough to steal!

[depakid]

17. " Nader would have exposed Bush as a not-so-facile tool, and an ignorant fool, in the 2000 debates"

Ross Perot played a similar role in 1992.

[Raine]

15. Fuck Nader

after what he's done he should be ashamed to show his ugly traitorius face! :argh:

[EFerrari]

19. I agree. They should be in the debates. n/t

[Auggie]

22. I agree too.

Though I would like to have a more viable third party. Not in my lifetime, I'm afraid.

[Greyhound]

20. Of course they should be heard. Excluding them sets a president for excluding any speech.

Anybody that can speak for a significant number of people should be heard, if only to affirm that they are nuts.

Politics is probably the most important communal activity Americans have left, it effects every one of us every day, and as we have seen, our system depends on an informed population. We don't pay attention and fail to exert our power and this is what we get.

Let them speak, it's the American thing to do.

[Mark E. Smith]

25. Remember when Ralphie used to say there was no difference ...

... between George W. Bush and Al Gore?

Nader is an ass of historic proportions.

I hope they stop him at the California border like a crate of bad cabbage.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

28. I'm voting Obama, but Ralph is right on the commission--it's a sham

it's a group comprised of only Dems and Republicans with no independents or third party voices, that gets to chose the standard for third party admission into the debates.

the whole thing should be given back to the league of women voters

they'd never agree to farce of a controlled environment for caribou barbie or move the schedule to accomodate mccain's cowardice