Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Folks prepping for another season of yelling "wtf, Nader?" owe it to themselves to read the transcript of his recent Meet The Press interview. I won't be voting for him, in part because Obama's inspired me to give the Democratic party one last chance, and in part because I'm disappointed Nader can't find a younger, unscarred mouthpiece to voice his refreshing, entirely merited complaints about our current nominees. Surely some charismatic celebrity like, I dunno, Eddie Vedder, or maybe a cute policy wonk, would be willing to hold a similar stance for the Green party. Better that than have Nader once again suffer the smears of self-loathing Dems, who would rather criticize those who actually voted their liberal ideals for abandoning the party rather than acknowledge its unsatisfactory record. Why sneer about the crippling futility of staunch liberalism when the centrists can't seem to achieve anything themselves? Why claim change must happen from inside the party when those in power silence worthwhile debate? Accusations of him ruining the 2000 election are not just ill-informed, they're pathetic.

Nader rightly notes in the interview that if the Dems fail to win this election, "they ought to just wrap up, close down, emerge in a different form." America is hungry for reform, something that should be incredibly easy for either nominee to exploit. But I'm also sympathetic to the idea that neither party is truly motivated to achieve it. If the next four years fail to prove otherwise, I won't be screaming for a third party so much as a new second.


Marc Hogan said...


(sorry, been watching too much yelling in this debate tonight)

all best,

Marc Hogan said...

more articulately:
"Ralph Nader to hop into the race. After all, there's not a dime's worth of a difference between a candidate promising tax cuts, pushing more health risk onto individuals, a re-invigoration of George Bush's campaign to dominate the world through military force, and an industry-friendly approach to environmental issues and his rival who's promising substantial socialization of medical risk, a 80 percent reduction in carbon emissions, and end to the war in Iraq (and to the mindset that led to war!), universal preschool, etc. Well, sure, there's judicial appointments -- abortion, gay rights, etc. -- and some small fry stuff about whether or not the NSA will have unrestrained surveillance powers. But basically it's just the same two corporate clones running on virtually identical platforms."

The Manthony said...

ok did you actually read either what I wrote or what Nader said before posting that? Did you miss that I'm planning to vote for Obama?

Nader KNOWS he doesn't have a chance of being president and he KNOWS that he couldn't actually influence this election's outcome (or any other, when the Dems aren't fucking themselves over). He's trying to bring forward issues that will otherwise be ignored by the mutual interest of both parties. Because of this gadfly status, he's been spun as a megalomaniac scapegoat by those offended that he's not satisfied with their efforts.

If he doesn't acknowledge that milquetoast polticians are preferable to fascist jesus freaks, its cuz THAT'S NOT HIS JOB.

The Manthony said...

It's very possible that Nader is knowingly throwing his legacy to the wolves in order to bring attention to issues he feels are being ignored, something that a less notorious Green Party candidate wouldn't be able to achieve. It wouldn't be the first time he was thinking one step ahead of those attacking him. He sounded totally uninterested in concepts like "legacy" in An Unreasonable Man, and if anything, his actions these last few days may be admirable proof of that. Not that all democrats are going to bother finding out WHY he's running again, sadly.

J T. Ramsay said...

You're gonna be giving the Democratic Party once last chance into eternity. Sometimes I feel like the Dems are the Old Navy of political parties -- constantly rebranding with minimal success.

Also nothing beats Marc Hogan Forkcasting the shit out of Obama for you.

Alfred Soto said...

Your post's last sentence: right on. Nader's an easy victim when lots of Dems won't acknowledge that the Gore people did little to woo the voters of his home state. The GOP wants to WIN elections, while the Dems want to convince the GOP that they believe in grace and "bipartisanship."