DISQUS

Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago

Nader had an exemplary early career (highway safety, hospital safety, clean air/water) but has marginalized himself with these ridiculous national campaigns. He should run for office in Maryland or Virginia.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Nader has the right to run whenever he wants. I haven't voted for him yet, but I'll always listen to what and his supporters have to say. Hell, Ralph has probably saved more lives than a dozen hospitals combined. And I respect him for that and for his unrelenting pressure against the corporatists.

Markos is just strutting like a male pigeon and trying to talk tough. We won an election and he thinks he can start carrying out a little ethic cleansing. Reminds me of Gingrich or Delay. Sad what a Napoleon complex can do to a guy.

Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago

i don't think your comment addresses the dominant criticisms of nader (which have nothing to do with his consumer and safety activism or his legal right to run for president). also, markos was critical of nader long before the recent election. as for ethnic cleansing, i doubt that markos even knows that nader is lebanese.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Ethic, not ethnic. Weak pun. Sorry, but my point is that saying FU to a crowd of people who share 90% of your views is petulant and childish behavior. Markos needs to smarten up.

phalamir · 1 year ago

"but my point is that saying FU to a crowd of people who share 90% of your views is petulant and childish behavior"

And when Nader stops doing that, maybe someone will care about him again.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Ya, he's either with us or he's with the terrorists, oh I mean the Republicans. He should sit down and shut up.

I think I've gone thru the looking glass.

aliasalias · 1 year ago

Bingo! to automatically insult an entire group of people that you dont disagree with on most things is really NOT like the general approach that Obama's inclusive approach represents ,and Obama is DEFINITELY reaching further from his basic ideals with his acceptance of some Repubs (tom coburn?,Lugar? etc.) than anything Ralph Nader stands for , in fact I would love to hear Obama respond to Kos' insulting treatment of another one of those 'organizers'. I am a regular reader of Daily Kos, but this attitude has a scent of hubris and total disregard for all the good that Nader has brought about , but he didnt do those things alone and to dismiss -just 'out of hand' people you dont know, that were real pioneers in changing things in the interest of 'the citizen' is annoying, and pompous sounding...a lot of good people out here that shouldnt be automatically defined..particularly in a derisive manner considering their contributions to society...but FU to to all? I am of that age group (58 yrs.) that got my attention drawn to what was happening to ALL of us by an unregulated, unaccountable, Gov. (inclusive thingy) and that 'people should get involved' to change things. yeah I think Obama is more inclusive than Kos' words show him to be.

An_American_Karol · 1 year ago

Any good Nader has done in the past is negated by his actions in helping to get Reagan and Bush elected.
His ego has taken over any good will he earned in his earlier more relevant life.
I have nothing but contempt for him now.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Do you have the same contempt for Markos? He was a Reagan and GHWBush voter.

Consider that possibility that Nader is acting in good will, trying to represent the people who support him. You may see it as ego, but they see it as dedication to the cause. Hopefully Obama will prove his concerns wrong, but the Democratic congress has been a Dubya rubber stamp for the past two years, so I don't blame anyone for keeping up the pressure.

An_American_Karol · 1 year ago

If Markos did what Nader did in 2000, I would feel the same. As it is, your question is silly.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

I voted for Gore in 2000. He won. But the Supreme Court gave it to Bush. Blaming Nader for that is just childish scapegoating.

An_American_Karol · 1 year ago

Nader has been making that argument for eight years, and it still does not absolve him of responsibility.
The two points Nader got in Florida would have made the recount or the SC decision moot.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Absolve? Did I walk into a church?

Ya, I wish the Nader supporters in close states had foreseen the outcome and voted for Gore, but they didn't. I don't blame Nader for that. If a third party, say a fascist or religious ultra-right, were to move ahead of the Dems and battle the GOP for primacy, would you condemn any Democrats who didn't cast their votes for the GOP to keep the ultras out of office?

People vote for the candidate who best represents their views. Pissing and moaning because we couldn't beat a half-wit like Bush, and trying to fob the blame off on a 3rd party candidate is truly ducking responsibility.

GWMustGo · 1 year ago

I don't think we can totally negate his good works of the past. His consumer advocacy was needed, timely, and more importantly RIGHT.

That does NOT mean that I will not berate his egotism and the idiocy of his runs for POTUS. He really needs to give that a rest.

okojo · 1 year ago

If you wipe away the "Consumer Advocate" patina that Nader puts in front of his name, the true title for Nader is "registered lobbyist" who lives in a townhouse in NW Washington, who is a millionaire via his investments and speakng fees and used the PIRGs as his little cult and piggy bank... There is much that Nader should be proud of, there is also much that Nader should be absolutely ashamed of...

Nader is a hypocrite, a shameless hypocrite at that.. He isn't a Saint. His PR and propaganda cover up much of the true Ralph Nader.
His "Uncle Tom" comment was hopefully the last straw of why would anyone should listen to him...

Diogenes · 1 year ago

If you wipe away "Saint of the Untouchables" from Mother Theresa the true title would be "wrinkled old lady with a cilice". But you can't wipe it away because that would be selective blindness and self-delusion.

Of course Nader's no saint, but he's no demon either. And telling him and his supporters to F-off is arrogance worthy of Hannity and Limbaugh. We won by a lot of electoral votes, but just a little less than 50% of this country voted for McCain and that nightmare Palin. I'm not kicking anyone off my team with as slim a margin as that.

okojo · 1 year ago

Telling Ralph Nader supporters to fuck off is fine, in my opinion. He runs a racket, where there is little transparency about Public Interest or how the PIRGs are set up. He has much of his non profits registered in Delaware in a myriad of foundations and holdings that only "Saint" Ralph controls.. Ditto on how his speaking fees are distributed, so he doesn't declare them as income, but he controls the funds.

The guy is a hypocrite. Insinuating that President Elect Obama could be an "Uncle Tom" is just a long line of stupid and ego centric things Nader has done throughout the years.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Agreed.

AdmNaismith · 1 year ago

Did Nader give Markos a wedgie in junior high? Geez...
Nader has some very pointed and important things to say about the contemporary political process, and he's right about nearly every one of them. True, he would be better off running for Rep or Senator, where he would have a better chance of winning, but if Markos is as dedicated to the process as he says, Nader is clearly showing us what's wrong and how to fix it. It's not like Obama got where he is outside of Illinois machine politics.

Lolis · 1 year ago

I don't think Nader shows us how to fix us anything, except perhaps health care, but anyone can tell you that. Nader talks a good game, but he knows nothing about politics or even organizing. Ron Paul did more in a couple months than Nader has ever done in three runs for prez.

Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago

he showed us how to "fix it" in 2000. great fix that was!
better way to fix it was to throw his support behind gore (which would have put him in office) and gain some political leverage that way. the way it turned out, he didn't have a lot of leverage, did he?

DAB · 1 year ago

Kos is blunter than I'd be (which means it could be his blunt talking) but I've reached a point where I agree with him. Nader is just noise, he doesn't have anything helpful to say, add or do. He's another Gravel, another Perot. The third-party pipe dream. That's fine, it's his right to say it, but it's certainly my right to think him a sanctimonious gnat and his supporters blinded to reality. I'm all for idealism, but not if it's only about what you're against. I still, to this day, have no real clue what Nader is for except, maybe, poetry and unicorns.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

I though Perot was half nuts. Still do.

But he sure was right about the "giant sucking sound". With our current unemployment we could really use all those manufacturing jobs that moved to Mexico, then headed across the Pacific.

But who needs to listen to those silly 3rd party candidates? What do they know?!

Lolis · 1 year ago

I actually campaigned for Nader in 2000 in California. I have lost all respect him for him only this year. Before that, I was proud of my vote for him because Gore was such a horrible candidate/progressive back then. But Nader always seem to be racializing Obama for his own moment in the spotlight. He was recently on Fox News for saying that Obama may become an "Uncle Tom" if he doesn't do what Nader thinks is right. This type of language is repulsive, especially because Nader could have made his point without using racial language. He does it solely to get attention from the corporate press. It is disgusting. I still wish Democrats were more liberal but now I understand that ideology is not always the best thing for this country. I learned that watching Bush destroy things I had no idea he could out of pure ideology. I don't want someone like that on the left, either. So yes, I am happy these days with my pragmatic Obama. I don't resent Nader supporters but I do resent Nader.

An_American_Karol · 1 year ago

Lolis, I lost respect for Nader when it became clear he could not win in 2000, and he did not pull out of the race and throw his support to Gore.
In 2004, when he took money from the Republicans to run his campaign, he was just a bad joke. Now, he is nothing.

Tyke · 1 year ago

In 2000 he promised not to campaign in states where Bush & Gore were close. He lied - most likely because he wasn't getting enough attention and just couldn't resist the spotlight.

Nader has a degree of ownership for the past 8 years. His piece is tiny compared to the major players but like a catalyst that allows the main chemicals to react, Nader facilitated the ascension of the Cheney/Bush debacle.

shell · 1 year ago

Markos's post is entirely true. And I agree -- anyone STILL rooting for Nader is either very young (and doesn't know the 2000 or 2004 elections) or is sort of loopy.

Every time Nader makes a fool of himself (every 4 years, like clockwork), he says something REALLY bad -- like stating, when asked his stand on abortion said he wasn't into "gonadal politics."

What many are forgetting is that it isn't 1967 again -- Ralph's good works (mostly with cars) are long gone. Why doesn't he take on the Big Three automakers now? Oh yeah, not as much attention. Besides, that work would be non-stop -- not an Every-4-Years deal, where he can go back and rest up for 3 years in between.

He has drifted back to age 4 -- a child craving attention. What a sad ending for a once-great American.

green_libertarian · 1 year ago

Nader did some very good things, once upon a time. He's also a complete hypocrite, crushing union organizing in his own organizations, alienating nearly all of his former allies, cooking the books at the firms he runs, claiming in 2000 he wouldn't campaign in battleground states, like Florida, and then doing exactly that.

Sad, really.

He talks, doesn't walk the walk.

dula · 1 year ago

Oh relax, Mary. Put your energy into fixing that site of yours so that busy people can get to the meat faster...user friendly it is not. That orange highlighter doesn't help.

roschelle · 1 year ago

The full 60 minutes President-elect Obama interview

lucky hussein · 1 year ago

OT, but here's why shillary should not be SoS: kissiger backs her..
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11...

TootsMcGee · 1 year ago

Yeah, that reader will never visit Markos' blog again. Suuuuure. He's probably come back 20 times just to read the comments from that post alone.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Project much?

EdA · 1 year ago

Fortunately, this year not only did the Democratic candidate for President win the election, but he did so with a margin too big to steal. There were a couple of states where the knuckleheads who voted for Nadir [lowest point, opposite of "zenith"] would have thrown the margin to McCain, except for the people who balanced them out a bit by voting for serial polygamist Bob Barr.

An_American_Karol · 1 year ago

Bob Barr is a polygamist?

EdA · 1 year ago

He is a SERIAL polygamist. Like Newt Gingrich, he's had three marriages, although in fairness not simultaneously. This helped make him so specially qualified to draft and push through the Defense of Marriage Act.

cmpnwtr · 1 year ago

Markos is right. The Naderites derive all their self-absorbed meaning from being in love with themselves for being so pure for having cast their lot with meaningless and empty gestures. For them it's about them, and not real governing.

Diogenes · 1 year ago

Wow! You can read minds! That's so cool!

Can you tell what I'm thinking right now?

michael_carr · 1 year ago

Um, yeah... okay... whatever passes for legitimate poltical dissent these days. Oh, what reasoned discourse... Oh, what F-N tripe. Can we puh-leaze get beyond blaming Nader for everything that is wrong with our two party system, and a media complicit in this dysfunction? Really? Can't we just grow up here? I'll take vodka over the KoolAid any day. (Well, as long as I can afford it.)

domino · 1 year ago

Those who support Nader and I have voted for him twice, are to the left of the Democratic party. It is our right to vote for him. What Markos, Eric Alterman and too many others refuse to acknowledge is that they are Democratic party members do or die. And the Democratic party has some problems.

A vote for Nader is not a vote for someone who has a chance, but a protest vote that is meant to send a message to the Democrats. But, Markos and Alderman took the message as some sort of betrayal. I am 53 and have voted since 1976. I voted for third parties, except for three times for Democrats and those times were because the Bushes pissed me off. So, I am not one who you can count on to vote Democratic. In the presidential elections, I have always had a left wing choice. In the other national elections, Colorado has not given me a choice. So, I leave that race blank.

It is hard to throw my support to the Democrats because they have too often spit in the faces of their supporters. I voted for Kerry and Obama and not for Nader (or McKinney) because Colorado has become far closer than before. But, I would have voted for Nader if I lived in California or Alabama.

okojo · 1 year ago

Ralph Nader is far from being progressive. His rhetoric doesn't match his actions. He is incredibly disingenuous, whether how he reports his income, how he controls his numerous non profits and the foundations that technically runs them, in which he holds, how he treats his staff, etc.

He is warped, and seemed to be in love with his own image. He is a millionaire lobbyist who lives in NW Washington off Connecticut Ave...

I dealt with the PIRGs in College via Student Gov't, I dealt with Public Interest after college and some of their idiotic canvassing and my friends work for PI. They used progressive issues to only do one thing to support the ego of Ralph Nader, or pay legal fees one of Ralph's legal cases. Nader's propaganda doesn't match the reality of what he has become.

vkobaya · 1 year ago

Nader has done more for this country than any other leader, often quietly without seeking the greasy praise of politicians. He is responsible for every single progressive act that Congress has passed since he became active in the 50s. If Nader were to enumerate all this achievements, they would be blinding.

Nader doesn't want praise. He is seeking to show us the way. Dumping hatred on him for our own blindness is sheer foolishness. It is not egotism, but a desire to lead us in another direction which has repeatedly led to his seeking the presidency, not to undermine our Democratic candidates but to show them that they cannot again and again ignore the needs of the American people. Who has disappointed us again and again? Why, the Democratic party leaders, when the Democrats are supposed to be the people's party.

Pelosi and Reid have repeatedly had the chance to squash Bush's agenda and time and time again they've caved to Bush whether through cowardice or complicity or being secret card carrying Republicans. Obama ostensibly is antiwar, but is he? Does he intend to end both wars? No. Not even the Iraq war.

Are any of them opposed to Bush's wiretapping, in a concrete way, other than saying they oppose it? Sickeningly even Obama voted for it.

Kucinich, McKinney and Nader are the only ones who really opposed Bush and never backed down. And, my guess is Kucinich and McKinney have taken their clue from Nader.

drobert_bfm · 1 year ago

You should read Kos' post in full (you can't expect Jake Tapper to do that, now can you?). Kos made the extremely valid point that contrary to Nader's addled-brained assertion that there was no difference between Reagan and Carter in 1980 ignores the hundreds of thousands of dead under Reagan's regime of Terror in Latin America. Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize. Nader asserted that there was no difference between Bush and Gore in 2000. That would be news to the 600000+ dead in Iraq and their millions of family members. Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize.

To claim that "Nader doesn't want praise" is to cut oneself so utterly from the reality-based community as to fully deserve Kos' invective. Nader has done NOTHING in the last 20 years EXCEPT self-promote, to absolutely no policy end whatever. I'll admit that he did a lot of good in the 50s and 60s, but that is pretty much where it ends. And to claim credit for "every single progressive act that Congress has passed" since he appeared on the scene is laughable at best. So please, take your little fanboy act and go home.

Indigo · 1 year ago

Every time people talk about him, good, bad, or indifferent, Nader wins.

Kcunac · 1 year ago

These days I find myself increasingly dismayed by the arrogance and high handedness that characterizes many of the blogs I loved before and during the election.

anarchy · 1 year ago

I still support the idea of a third party and I voted
for Nader in 2000 because I didn't like Gore or
Bush.

very glad I'm in IL and not FL but I also don't
think I'll ever vote for Mr Nader again.

yes, Ralph Nader has indeed done some
great things for the people of this country
but somewhere along the line he really
seems to have lost it.

Dennis Kucinich is the closest thing
we've got to the Ralph Nader of old -
the one who wrote "Unsafe At Any Speed"

that's all I really have to say, thanks for reading.

Wolfsinger · 1 year ago

Third party? Potential for good.

Ralph Nader? Took the shining path to bitterness and irrelevance 30 years ago.

Actions speak loudest.

Rab · 1 year ago

Nader is far from the "independent" candidate he pretends he is. He's a cold bowl of oatmeal, no real human connections in the personal sense and it shows in his proffesional dealings. He did good a long, long time ago but the asshole needs to go away.

Bill · 1 year ago

One hears more and more criticism about the arbitrary nature of internet-based "information." Wikipedia is unfairly targeted, as it is generally pretty helpful and informative.

This pointless, idiotic blog posting, however, deserves to be blasted with both barrels. What a waste of time. Get a life.