Monday, September 17, 2007

A Very Reasonable Man

Recently I viewed the documentary "An Unreasonable Man", detailing the life and accomplishments of Ralph Nader. Like many people who voted for the Democrats in the 2000 Presidential election, I was somewhat pissed off at Nader for possibly tilting a very close election towards the Republicans by taking votes away from Gore/Lieberman.

Of course, the REAL culprit in the loss was a poorly run campaign and a suicidal failure to capitalize on the insane popularity of the Clinton administration, even AFTER being impeached and nearly convicted. Gore's campaign advisers simply missed the obvious, and so they let the Presidency...and the country...fall into the hands of the worst people to ever run our government.

Here's an account of Nader giving a speech last week, where he chastised the "spineless, gutless" Democrats in Congress for failing to impeach Bush and Cheney.

Unreasonable? Not in the slightest.

What's unreasonable is the ridiculous failure of our Democratic leadership to hold the Bush/Cheney regime accountable, allowing them to further erode our nation and edge us closer to economic collapse. Apparently, our cautious leaders are concerned with positioning and politicking themselves into continued incumbency, while happily allowing our country to slide further into the abyss.

From The Raw Story:
Consumer advocate Ralph Nader, who mounted failed bids for the White House in 2000 and 2004, excoriated the Bush administration for its post-9/11 policies that critics say trample on civil liberties and for its pursuit of war in Iraq, which he said distracts from fighting Osama bin Laden.

The onetime Green Party candidate appeared at an anti-war rally in Washington Saturday, where he chastised "spineless, gutless" Democrats in Congress for failing to boot Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney from office.

"The impeachable offenses of Bush outnumber any other list of impeachable offenses of any US president," Nader said. "Not only did he and Cheney violate their oath of office to uphold the constitution and the laws of the land, but they proceeded to impose a practice of torture, to arrest thousands of Americans without charges and throw them in prisons without lawyers.... They spied on millions of Americans randomly without judicial approval. How many more impeachable offenses do those spineless, gutless, hapless Democrats need in the Congress."

[...]

Because Democrats control Congress -- after a power shift following the 2006 midterm elections -- they can cut off funding for the war, hold hearings on Bush administration policies and begin impeachment proceedings. Beyond failing to do any of that, though, there have not been vocal calls for Bush's resignation, Nader said, which makes Democrats now weaker than those in Congress when former-President Richard Nixon was forced to resign in the wake of Watergate.

[...]
I dunno about anyone else, but the guy sounds completely reasonable to me.

10 comments:

vagabondblogger said...

I agree. I'm sick and tired of the Democrats we have, who refuse to go after Bush, Cheney and Co. It's pretty disheartening.

sellitman said...

It doesn't matter what he said. Right or wrong Nader and those who give him Blog space and airtime don't seem to get it.

What is it?

It is ...Nader has disappeared since the last Presidential election only to rear his head close to the time to fuck up yet another election.

It is...Nader only rails on Democrats.

It is....He is a shill for the Republican party and anyone who thinks otherwise should pay better attention.

yossarian said...

sellitman,
Your bitterness and partisanship blinds you to the facts. Mr. Nader is calling for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Citizen Ralph is an equal opportunity railer. As for me, I believe the Republicans are spawn of the devil and the Democrats have the spine of a jellyfish.

CT Bob said...

Not to mention that, generally, the Democrats absolutely NEED some calling out! Maybe if we collectively shake them up, they'll get off their tentative and over-cautious asses and maybe actually DO something!

Anonymous said...

I'm frustrated with the Dems too. But remember a few things. First, the mainstream media is against them, often portraying them as weak and disorganized even when they aren't. Second, when you consider that Lieberman votes with the Republicans on key issues, the Dems don't even have a full majority.

About Nader. He may sound reasonable, but remember that his ego is his ruination. He felt that HE was more important than the well-being of the USA, campaigning in '00 in pivotal electoral states, thus guarenteeing George Bush a win. He knew perfectly well what he was doing. We have him to thank for the past 7 years.

If you judge Nader by his actions (rather than his words), he is a disaster.

vagabondblogger said...

Anonymous:
The Republicans Stole the 2000 election, and there's plenty of questions regarding the validity of the 2004 election, as well. You can't blame Nader. The Republicans had Pat Buchanan as a contender. The Supreme Court handed the election to Bush and Co.

CT Bob said...

Like I basically said, the 2000 election should have been a slam-dunk for Gore, but to have let it get close enough for Nader's numbers to have any effect at all is much more a reflection of the shitty campaign and mistakes made by the Dems than any spoiler role a supposedly insignificant candidate like Nader could mount.

Gore could have prevented the Florida theft by campaigning more decisively and carrying other states they deemed not worthwhile, like (I think) Illinois, which they gave up on and turned out to be much closer than they expected.

Jim said...

Anonymous and Sellitman,
It is baffling that Citizen Ralph continues to be bashed for the Democrats losing the 2000 and 2004 elections. For him to be singled out among the many other variables that you could pick in your post election analyses says more about you than him. There are more than enough woulda, coulda, shoulda things that piled up during those elections to hash over than to focus just on Nader's role.
The criticism that Nader's ego got in the way seems beside the point. He's just a guy who is unwilling to compromise on core principles to play the political game as it's played in this country. It's too bad there are not more egos like his.

sellitman said...

Has any of you Nader fans ever wondered why the Repigs gave so copiously to his campaign?

If he didn't matter he would of gotten squat.

He deserves all the scorn I can muster and that scorn is well earned.

Anonymous said...

Are you still bitching about the 2000 election?

Let me give you a clue here - In America, in the year 2000, the guy with the most US Supreme
Court votes wins.

Period.

Now quit kvetching and get back to work!