Does anyone know what blend of arrogance, egotism, and malevolence had decided Ralph Nader to again run for president? The last time he did it, we got GWB, a couple of wars, an acceleration of Bill Clinton’s extraordinary rendition, a near recession, an attorney general who assured us that the US Constitution did not confer the rights of habaes corpus to citizens, and a president to talks as though words were strange objects emanating from his lips.
Nader claims he runs to “call attention” to national problems unexplored by the two dems main runners. Fiddle. He runs to call attention to himself, and for no other reason. His peculiar usefulness as a consumer bulldog has morphed into a geriatric longing for the front page.
blah.
21 responses so far ↓
1 Beth // Feb 24, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Did you just happen to see Independent Lens on PBS? They showed “An Unreasonable Man.”
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/unreasonableman/nader.html
You either love him or hate him.
2 admin // Feb 26, 2008 at 10:58 am
Beth, I had not seen that show. Thanks for the link. Do you “love him or hate him”?
3 Tex // Feb 26, 2008 at 11:52 am
Nader expounds upon the control of ‘Big Corporations’ over both the democrats and republican agendas.
The small segment of independents and some anarchists will find his message close to their ideaologies.
He has about as much of a chance at winning the desk in the Oval Office as does former Gov. Mike Hucabbee.
4 admin // Feb 26, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Dunno, I hope so. He sure had an impact last time he stuck his enlarging head through the voting booth.
5 Tex // Feb 26, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Nader’s socialist agenda will have some appeal, to the misguided hanger-ons that still think China and Cuba are “the worker’s paradise”.
6 admin // Feb 28, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Well, the word socialist does not have the zing for me that it may for you. And there is much of Nader’s agenda with which I agree. I just find it unforgiveable for him to insert himself into races he cannot possibly win and gives to the other team.
7 Tex // Feb 29, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I reckon the word Socialism evokes zing to me because it is the very heart of wealth redistribution. Take it from the haves and give it to the have nots..call me a Capitalist..I find that moniker appealing. I worked for mine..keep away from it!
It is mind boggling to me that the highly educated in this country love this form of societal madness. It just doesn’t work within a democracy..perhaps in autocracies, maybe. China has abandoned its strict rules and is racing toward capitalism. Socialized medicine is a trainwreck worldwide, yet many yearn to drink at the cup of the idealogy of Marx, Lenin and Mao.
8 admin // Feb 29, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Well, Tex, I am old fashioned and persist is finding differences between socialism and communism. For some thoughts, check this: http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html.
9 Tex // Mar 2, 2008 at 9:05 am
Sorry Puffin..the link did not work..it stated that you need to “check the spelling”…?
It is not that your are old fashioned, IMHO, but rather that your thinking process has compartmentalized your view of socialism. History proves that: all communist governments were practioners of socialistic ideals…on the other hand…not all socialistic countrys are in the communist fold.
The popular view (right or wrong)is that socialism and communism are one in the same.
Being well educated in the liberal arts and wise to geo-political influences, you are the exception rather than the rule.
Perhaps when Pres. Reagan uttered those historic words..”Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”..socialism evolved into a more comfortable definition.
I feel certain that my southern upbringing, attending a state university has influenced my views that are at odds with the more highly educated of some…Ivy League schools. ;o)
10 admin // Mar 2, 2008 at 1:54 pm
http://www.fundamentalfinance.com/blogs/socialism-vs-capitalism.php
Try this one. The above link is actually correct but doing very wiggy things.
Not sure I get the relation of Reagan’s plea to definitions of socialism and communism. And even if the two are one in popular notions, they are still quite different. Accepting this would cut down on the hastily bandied scare words, no?
11 Beth // Mar 3, 2008 at 12:05 am
I actually love Ralph Nader. I voted for him when I felt I had no other choice.
One thing I can’t stand is when people chastise me for “wasting” my vote!
12 admin // Mar 3, 2008 at 3:37 am
::making a note not to say this to Beth::
Well there is no question Nader did some important consumer-awareness work. Go for it, Beth. Do you have time to educate me about your reasons for finding Nader a viable candidate? This blog is no use if you guys who are kind enough to post don’t stretch my brain a bit.
13 Tex // Mar 4, 2008 at 12:26 pm
The link worked and it just about proved my point that pure socialism is not ideal unless the majority wants a nanny state to take care of all the woes of society.
America and other democracies have prospered due to the entrepeneural spirit that is otherwise lacking in a socialistic state.
I cannot imagine working for a company that could not fire anyone. Everyone has to answer to someone for performance..(Congress not withstanding)..in order for a normal progression of success to be achieved.
14 admin // Mar 5, 2008 at 1:24 am
Good point. I don’t suppose any economic theory or government is ideal. I certainly endorse democracy but I do not think it needs to be realized in a way that ensures billions for large corporations and jack shit for the middle class.
15 Tex // Mar 5, 2008 at 5:23 pm
There you go again with the gutter utterings!
If you consider your lifestyle a pile of dung..then you have a legitimate beef with your station in the good ole US of A. It could be much worse and you know it..as you have spent time in places such as Pakistan, etc.
Killing corporate America will not introduce a heaven on earth here.
As you say, it is not a perfect world..not supposed to be or heaven would not be a reward.
16 Tex // Mar 6, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Oh Puffin how great thou art…I am really mystified at how you mix gutteral slang in with the perfectly exquisite delivery of your thought processes. You do not need the street talk, you are much too refined and it actually demeans the points of your abilities to debate the issues.
I do love to banter with you and get you all riled up! ;o)
17 admin // Mar 7, 2008 at 5:13 pm
I luv a good gutteral saying now and then.
18 Tom Murphy // Apr 6, 2008 at 1:46 pm
well every time I meet people here, I’m sure they are very young and don’t know what to say, that’s why they write weird stuff
19 admin // Apr 8, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Sorry, Tom. I am 70 and if I have teenage readers, I am unaware of it. So what is weird?
20 burgundy // Apr 9, 2008 at 5:07 am
Seems different from your previous posts. Did YOU write this post, or someone else did? Anyway, I think your readers really enjoyed reading it.
21 admin // Apr 9, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I write all this stuff unless otherwise attributed, burgandy. Nice to see you here.
Leave a Comment