Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ralph Nader : " MY FRIEND BARACK "

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 07:49 PM
Original message
Ralph Nader : " MY FRIEND BARACK "
<>


After nearly two years out, I can imagine George W. Bush writing his successor the following letter:



Dear President Obama:


As you know I've been peddling my book Decision Points and while doing interviews, people ask me what I think of the job you're doing. My answer is the same: He deserves to make decisions without criticism from me. It's a tough enough job as it is.


But their inquiries did prompt me to write you to privately express my continual admiration for the job you are doing. Amazing! I say "privately" because making my sentiments public would not do either of us any good, if you know what I mean.


First, I can scarcely believe my good fortune as to how your foreign and military policies--"continuity" was the word used recently by my good friend, Joe Lieberman--has protected my legacy. More than protected, you've proven yourself just as able--and I may say sometimes even more so--to "kick ass" as my Daddy used to say.


My pleasant surprise is darn near limitless. Your Justice Department has not pursued any actions against my people--not to mention Dick Cheney and I--that the civil liberties and human rights crowd keep baying for you to do.


Overseas, all I see are five stars. You are roaring in Afghanistan, dispatching our great special forces into Yemen, saying, like me, that you'll go anywhere in the world to kill those terrorists. When you said you would assassinate American citizens abroad suspected of "terrorism"--that news came over the radio during breakfast when I was eating my shredded wheat and I almost choked with amazement. You got cajones, buddy. I was hesitant about crossing the border into Pakistan--but you, man, are blasting away. Even Dick, who would never say it publically, told me he is impressed.


The Leftists are always trying to have your policies show me up negatively. Hah--they're having one hell of a tough time, aren't they?


Me state secrets, you state secrets. Me executive privilege, you executive privilege. Me stop the release of torture videos, you backed me up. Me indefinite detention, you indefinite detention. Me extraordinary rendition; you extraordinary rendition. Me sending drones, you sending tons more, flying 24/7. Me just had to look the other way on collateral damage, you doing the same and protecting our boys doing it. Me approving night time assassination raids, you're upping the ante especially since General Petraeus took over. Me beefing up Defense, you not skipping a beat. Me letting the CIA loose, you told them operate at large. Me demanding no pictures of our fallen troops, you doing the same, but allowing the families to go to Dover which I should have done.


There is one big difference. I never cracked a law book. You are a top Harvard lawyer and teacher of constitutional law. So when you do what I did, man, it's--what's the word--legitimization!


Domestically, sure you rag Wall Street, but you continued the big bail out of the bankers and their supporting cast. Sure, you're tougher with your words, but they deserve it--remember I said that the Wall Streeters "got drunk" and "got a hangover".


What I get such a kick out of is how you handled the unions and libs who backed you with dreams of Hope and Change. How smoothly you let them learn they got nowhere to go, just as we used to tell our conservative wing the same thing (though now they've been reborn as growling Tea Partiers). So, cardcheck, single payer, rolling back my Party's passage of legislation in Congress--you made them forget it!


You have been such a great president--backing me on so many things--keeping most tax cuts and shelters, support for my oil and gas buddies (my base), big loan guarantees for nukes, keeping Uncle Sam from bargaining down pharma, expanding free trade, not going tough on China (my Daddy especially liked this one), avoiding class struggle rhetoric and so on.


You want to know how confident I am about you? Even though you called waterboarding "torture," I proudly admitted approving its use to protect our country and its freedoms. Isn't that really what the Presidency is all about, along with honoring our troops and the entire national defense efforts?


Semper fi--
George W. Bush


P.S. My mother Barbara is a big fan. She calls your term so far Obamabush. Cute, aye, for someone who was never a wordsmith.


<http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/My-Friend-Barack-by-Ralph-Nader-101122-710.html>


.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. I imagine W* drunk-dialing the WH switchboard more easily than "writing".
But Nader's points are valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Y'know?
Ya read something like this and it leaves a really bad impression.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I wonder if Obama has ever read a discussion thread on DU? Just curious and if so, I wonder which
topic thread caught his attention?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. he best not read this one
shoot, his handlers wouldn't allow it!

he's in the cocoon, now. the elitist of the elite. he and w are brothers, like bill and poppy, now.
sure as heck wasn't what i voted for. fool me once your fault, fool me twice? Errrrrrr.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. Within a year, the Obama camp will begin ramping up their 2012 re-election campaign.
:popcorn:

Its going to be interesting to watch & listen to the coming speeches regarding HIS successes vs. HIS failures and what exactly he accomplished within his first term. I'm sure we'll hear the same old campaign line that the ' fight & struggle for common folk continues and that there is MUCH MORE to do ' and its now his job to finish what he began back in 2008 and thats why he needs your RE-NEWED support for his 2012 re-election. My question to him would be, does he remember exactly what he promised the people way back in 2008 in exchange for their voting support? Does HE actually believe he delivered most, if not ALL of his 2008 ' Hope & Change ' campaign promises to the people? Is it true or false that once elected, he began reneging on many of HIS ' Hope & Change ' campaign promises to the people? What exactly is he promising the people this time in exchange for their 2012 re-election support?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. K & R
Ralph Nader is my hero!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. The funny thing is, we wouldn't HAVE the wars/war crimes/tax cuts/etc if it weren't for Nader. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. funny thing is, the 200000 democrats who voted for bush had a greater influence on the election..
another real funny thing, not funny ha-ha mind you, is that anybody who meets the requirements can run for president without your approval.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. "anybody who meets the requirements can run for president without your approval."
Edited on Mon Nov-22-10 10:10 PM by BzaDem
Did I ever say otherwise? Of course people to claim to be "progressives" (such as Nader) can enable Republican victories! I never claimed they didn't have the right to enable Republicans. While a top-2 primary system like have in California/Louisiana/Washington would be nice (resulting in only the top two candidates on the ballot in November), until that system is instituted everywhere, Nader can enable Republicans till his heart's content.

I'm just saying it sounds a bit dumb for one to whine about policies that they enabled to be enacted (and without which they wouldn't have been enacted).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
appal_jack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
48. Al Gore was perfectly free to adopt progressive policies
Al Gore was perfectly free to adopt progressive policies during the 2000 campaign, in a strategic move to lure Nader raiders back to the Democratic camp. He declined, and instead we had Joe Fucking LIEberman as our VP, right behind wooden-Al-Gore, with both of them squandering what positive aspect's of the Clinton legacy there were.

The 2000 election results are not Nader's 'fault.' If we are to assign blame, let's point fingers at the electronic voting machines, the RW Supreme Court doing pirouettes around its 'States Rights' tradition, and all the other bullshit. But this nonsensical scolding of progressive candidates when the Democrats fail to keep 'their' base happy has got to stop, especially in a thread that outlines what a betrayal progressives are experience RIGHT NOW from our latest Democratic President.

-app
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
53. I'd honestly like to know your "progressive" creds...
You constantly say you're "progressive" while denigrating most of the real Progressive people I know and know of...

I'm courteously asking you...

What's your definition of "Progressive"?

What are your credentials?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight armadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Never argue with a fool
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. - Mark Twain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlabamaLibrul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. Only five votes counted in that election. Oh how I wish I could unrec this bulljive every time it
came up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still a Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. No Nader, no Sumpreme Court vote
It was a chain of events.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #17
46. +10000000000000000000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
54. No Pat Buchanan, no SCOTUS
No Monica Moorehead, no SCOTUS...

And, by the way, Gore surrendered...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlabamaLibrul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #54
60. Oh but there you go looking for any reason besides the evil socialist vote stealer Nader
as to why Bush stole the 2000 election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #60
64. There's nothing evil about Socialism... (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #17
61. no monica lewinsky, gore sails in.
no dull as dishwater gore hedging bets, no jews for buchanan, no katherine harris/jeb bush, no lieberman allowing late and incorrect military mail votes, etc......to blame bush on nader would be laughable if the blame nader meme weren't so dangerous.

your posts, as usual, are pure drivel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still a Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #61
69. The undeniable truth is Gore wins if Nader doesn't run
None of the things you bring up would have made the difference if Ralph didn't run a campaign he knew had no chance of winning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-24-10 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #69
70. that's just insane.
Edited on Wed Nov-24-10 06:12 AM by tomp
all of the other things are at least equally to blame. but the other things have nothing to do with denying the right of anyone anytime to run for office. if the candidate can't overcome all other contenders that is the candidate's fault first and foremost. what you assert as fact in no way can be considered fact.

you may be anti-democratic or perhaps you're just an idiot. if the latter, in that case good luck to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. Really? So there weren't Democrats in Congress enabling W at every turn? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
28. Really? You mean we never had any of those things under a Democratic President?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
33. You're like the Right blaming Clinton for 9-11. Will you ever grow up and take responsibility?
It's unbelievable how much you whine and blame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #6
37. Funny thing is how every time Nader makes a speech that is so
dead on, a few people forget that GORE WON THE ELECTION, and it was stolen by the Bush Family's buddies on the Supreme Court, among a few other tricks they used along the way. Not to mention all those Dems in Florida who voted for Bush.

I used to think only Republicans would display that kind of amnesia, after all it IS in their best interests to try send the legal crime of the century, the theft of an election by the SC, down the memory hole. What is your reason for wanting to cover for those as yet, unprosecuted traitors?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
43. FYI-the 2000 election was STOLEN. Gore WON. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
56. pure ignorant and worthless drivel.
comments like these expose an extremely dull or brainwashed mind or a knowing collaborator with the corrupt-beyond-corrupt two party system.

a vomit-inducing level of disgusting either way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
68. +1,000,000. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. K and R. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. Huh? Big Oil has Big plans that call for the removal of Obama. Therefore,
Edited on Mon Nov-22-10 10:00 PM by McCamy Taylor
W. may call him lots of things---starting with "Boy"---but BFF is not one of them. What part of the Southern Strategy does Nadar not comprehend?

Once Obama is out of office and a member of the ex-presidents club, it will be different. But as long as he stands between Exxon and more profits, it will be One House investigation after another. His will be the "sleaziest, most corrupt administration of all time" and no matter what he does the right wing will claim it is reparations for slavery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Why 'Boy'?
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 01:07 AM by RZM
Wars, wiretapping, pro-big business policies, social conservatism, evangelical Christianity . . . all of these things and many more are vintage W. But calling adult African-Americans 'boy' doesn't sound like him at all. There's more than enough negatives in the Bush legacy to go around with having to invent new ones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 01:19 AM
Response to Original message
13. At least he didn't say 'Uncle Tom' this time n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still a Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
15. And I can imagine George Bush never being elected, if you hadn't ran
Surpluses, an economy humming along, relative peace, but it wasn't good enough for Ralph or his ego. Now he desperately wants to pretend there is no difference between Bush and the Democrats.

No sale, Ralph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. What about all the Dems who voted overwhelmingly for Bush tax cuts, the War on Afghanistan and Iraq,
etc.? What about the ones who refuse to hold Bush accountable to this day? Is that Nader's fault too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still a Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. No. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. So basically, Nader had nothing to do with anything you listed.
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 11:41 AM by superduperfarleft
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still a Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. You may be forgetting
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 11:58 AM by Still a Democrat
Those were called the Bush tax cuts for a reason and never would have been proposed by President Gore. Also, most Democrats voted against them in both chambers. With Gore as president, they never happen.

The IWR was pushed by Bush with misleading or false information in the shadow of 9-11. To assume the same series of events in Iraq and Afghanistan under a Gore administration is unfounded, at best. Some speculate 9-11 never would have happened under Gore.

I don't think even the most ardent Nader supporter can honestly say the those events would unfold the same way under Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. Delete dupe
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 03:28 PM by Catherina
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. He's been saying that the whole time
As do many people to the left of the most progressive Democrats (and even some progressive Democrats themselves). I think he has a point there, but certainly not enough of one to ever get my support.

People like Nader spend a lot of their time criticizing Democrats for the same reasons that Communists used to spend a lot of their time attacking Social Democrats. It's a given to them that the right is an enemy, but the moderate left is the more serious threat, since they capture the support of people who should be backing the far left. The more moderate leftists talk a good game, but in the end they are only pretending to be on the side of working people since they are interested in operating within the confines of the current system and not radically overhauling it. Nader probably believes that in a perfect world, he wouldn't be a marginal presence in US politics and it's left and not the right that limits his relevance.

Nader's not a Communist and this isn't 1928, but there are certain historical parallels in his approach to those in between himself and the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #15
55. No Pat Buchanan, no bush...
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 07:36 PM by ProudDad
Or how about that democrat who designed the "butterfly ballot"?


As far as that ponzi scheme of an "economy" is concerned, it was going to blow up at any rate...

And Clinton planted the hardiest seeds of its collapse...

And Gore surrendered...

And as Al Gore said, "Al Gore lost the election."

So - open memo to all of you Nader haters -- get a fuckin' life... Or at LEAST learn some fucking history...

It's amazing to watch you try to defend an ubber-blue dog, pro-war clown like the Al Gore of 2000 anyway... :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
22. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. Eventually, you'll learn (just like the Nader voters in 2000 did). Just a question of when.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. Really? You're funny. DLC speaking for Nader supporters. What a hoot. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #31
39. How about a Democrat advocating voting for a Democrat on DU?
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. I'm sorry. In case you missed it, that wasn't the conversation.
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 04:27 PM by Catherina
This conversation is about assuming to speak on behalf of something you hate as if you're in any position to understand it. BzaDem can no more speak for Nader supporters than Republicans can speak for Bernie Sanders. If you want to change the conversation, go ahead and start a new one but don't pretend your disjointed words are any sort of a response to what I'm pointing out. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. I voted Nader, 2000
biggest mistake of my life.

I'm sorry if you don't believe me.

I'm in Texas, figured my vote would not matter anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:48 PM
Original message
Again, right over your head. That was not the conversation. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. Again, right over your head. That was not the conversation. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #42
57. I voted for the candidate who spoke for me...
In 2000, that was Ralph Nader -- a true USAmerican patriot...

And not some blue-dog, pro-war corporate tool -- hell, I didn't vote for EITHER of the pro-war, "conservative" corporate tools...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #31
49. Do you accuse everyone of being DLC?
Because that did not go over my head.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #27
51. +1000000
And you're right. This is DEMOCRATIC Underground, not Independent or Green or (insert a word I'd get banned for) Nader Underground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
47. Nadar, the GOUND HOG of Democratic politics.
He sees his shadow every four years ... and decides that having a shadow is a reason to run for President.

Here is an idea ... maybe Nadar should run for the HOUSE, or the SENATE, or even a STATE House or STATE senate ... or as a state GOVERNOR ...

Currently, he runs as the left wing's version of Christine O'Donnell ... for President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MShakely Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
25. Sadly funny
and accurate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
32. What's the book Ralph is peddling lately?
Oh yeah, "Only the Super-rich can save us." The title makes it obvious what's wrong with Nader's form of activism.

Ralph commits the usual sin of omission that has become cliche among Obama's critics. Obama has done things Nader spent years fighting for, including the consumer financial regulation agency. Nader's very selective portrayal of the Obama administration, which leaves out any mention of progress on every one of the issues he raised, is grossly deceptive.

On a few items, he takes it a step further into blatant deception, such as the claim of "beefing up defense." Actually, defense spending is going down and the administration has proposed further cuts. If Ralph had a strong case he wouldn't have to lie and intentionally ignore what Obama has done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JamesA1102 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #32
40. Well said nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #32
58. And he's right
and they won't...

But, it was worth trying, Ralph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-24-10 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #58
72. No, he's not.
Waiting for the rich to solve our problems for us is a disgustingly elitist, passive ideology. And even judging by your own post, it's dis-empowering as well. That's yet another problem with Nader's recipe for political change. It leaves people feeling defeated and powerless because he doesn't have a realistic path to meaningful victory. That doesn't help the movement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JamesA1102 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
35. Has Nader apologized for helping Bush steal the 2000 election yet?
Maybe he's stating his efforts to help the GOP in 2012.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superduperfarleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Derp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #35
63. Nothing to apologize for
Gore ran a shit campaign...

The Gore surrendered without a fight...

Nothing for Ralph to apologize for...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JamesA1102 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. Total BS
If not for Nader, Gore would have won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Itchinjim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
38. Fuck Nader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
45. Nader nails it! Anyone who can't admit the truth he speaks is delusional and in denial. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
50. Fuck you, Nader. You and your massive ego are at least half the problem.
I cannot stand that weasel. And apologies to weasels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #50
59. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
52. Ouch.
Painful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
62. ROFL
"The Leftists are always trying to have your policies show me up negatively. Hah--they're having one hell of a tough time, aren't they?

"Me state secrets, you state secrets. Me executive privilege, you executive privilege. Me stop the release of torture videos, you backed me up. Me indefinite detention, you indefinite detention. Me extraordinary rendition; you extraordinary rendition. Me sending drones, you sending tons more, flying 24/7. Me just had to look the other way on collateral damage, you doing the same and protecting our boys doing it. Me approving night time assassination raids, you're upping the ante especially since General Petraeus took over. Me beefing up Defense, you not skipping a beat. Me letting the CIA loose, you told them operate at large. Me demanding no pictures of our fallen troops, you doing the same, but allowing the families to go to Dover which I should have done.

"There is one big difference. I never cracked a law book. You are a top Harvard lawyer and teacher of constitutional law. So when you do what I did, man, it's--what's the word--legitimization!"


:rofl: Ain't that the fuckin' truth!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
66. Nader is an egotistical ass but he is also right as rain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
67. WHY, oh WHY, is Nader so revered here? HE COST OUR NATION DEARLY!!!!!
HELLO?! 2000 anyone?!?!?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-24-10 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
71. The question is not, is Obama the same as Bush.
Edited on Wed Nov-24-10 06:47 AM by MilesColtrane
It is, is Obama better than McCain.

That is the choice we had, and we made the right choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC