Nader on BookTV, c-span2, now.

[elleng]

[lordsummerisle]

1. Thanks! n/t

[Sisaruus]

2. Thanks. It's a 3 hour live interview! Should be interesting.

[txlibdem]

3. Thanks to Nader we got Bushed n/t

[AlabamaLibrul]

4. At least you're tacitly implying he had any pull in the elections, unlike some. (eom)

[howaboutme]

5. Actually it was voting machine scam, not Nader.

Actually it was thanks to corrupt voting that we got Bushed. It is still going on now, thanks to both Parties. Why aren't the Democrats working on correcting the potential voter fraud now? I don't believe either Party cares.

The OP and I listed this topic at the same time. I'll bump your.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tabasco]

9. Either does the denial. n/t

[asdjrocky]

10. Yes.

That would be you, looking in a mirror.

[frylock]

47. because nader disenfranchised all those black voters in florida..

then he made 200000+ dems vote for bush. damn you nader!!1

[EFerrari]

17. Divide and conquer works. n/t

[Better Believe It]

11. Bull Shit. Is that Joseph Leiberman's main talking point?

Leiberman brought Gore down.

The 250,000 registered Florida Democrats who voted for Bush brought Gore down.

The Supreme Court and George W. Bush stole the election.

Thanks for leaving all of the above off the hook!

Conservative Dems thank you!

[upi402]

14. Kool Aid gets consumed here too. Supreme Court, computer voter scrubbing at Choicepoint (DBS)

and Jeb Bush with Kathlene Harris corrupted Florida's vote. Nader told the truth about the system, gave an alternative... and the TV propaganda machine went nuts and duped many many Democrats.

I can't get csrl.org that he mentioned to link. Says '403 Forbidden', both google and browser.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

56. But remember, there is no difference between Al Gore and George W.

So sayeth your pal, Ralph Nader.

[pnorman]

59. "There's Not A Dime's Worth Of Difference Between ...."

Funny how many here at DU are now saying the same thing about Obama & Bush! How many of those were the strident Nader-bashers of 2001 and later?

[Better Believe It]

61. Credible link please. Or are you just repeating refuted Leiberman talking points?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

63. I heard him draw the comparison with John Kerry and Bush on Hardball in 2004

But Politifact gives him "the benefit of the doubt"......barely.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jun/30/ralph-nader/nader-almost-said-gore-bush-but-not-quite/

His whole gig is to say both parties are the same, that how HE gets votes. Fuck him.

[Better Believe It]

64. The article you cite disproves the false claim that Nader said both parties are the same.

Did you bother to actually read the article? I did.

I have never heard a serious radical or leftist organization claim that both parties or competing candidates of the two major parties are the same or identical.

Can you name any that have with links?

But that simplistic notion is worth repeating when one is trying to descredit left organizations and people one disagrees with.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

65. From the article.....

"It doesn't matter who is in the White House, Gore or Bush, for the vast majority of government departments and agencies," Nader said in a news conference in September 2000.

"The only difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush is the velocity with which their knees hit the floor when corporations knock on their door," he told supporters in California a month later.

"It's a Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum vote," Nader said in Philadelphia four days before the election, repeating a favorite refrain of his. "Both parties are selling our government to big business paymasters. ...That's a pretty serious similarity."

Nader also failed to challenge Sam Donaldson on ABC's This Week when Donaldson said, "You don't think it matters. You've said it doesn't matter to you who is the president of the United States, Bush or Gore."
Nader replied, "Because it's the permanent corporate government that's running the show here ... you can see they're morphing more and more on more and more issues into one corporate party."


One party IS worse than the other, but he won't say it because it costs him votes.

Fuck him. He preys upon the "disenfranchised fringe" to feed his vanity run for President. He only draws votes away from Democrats, not Republicans. There is a HUGE difference between the two parties on several key issues, and he knows it and he doesn't give a fuck because those aren't his issues.

[Better Believe It]

66. "He only draws votes away from Democrats, not Republicans." Yet another false claim.

Can't find a credible link to back up your latest assertion, a rather silly claim at that?

George W. Bush got the votes of 250,000 registered Democrats in Florida. I suppose you just missed that "little" documented fact or preferred to ignore it.

When will the "swift boat" like attacks against Ralph Nader end?

When will people end the character assassination campaign against Nader?

Some people continue to believe that if you sling enough crap against Ralph Nader some of it will stick.

Thinking and honest progressives won't buy that bull shit.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

70. I'm not going to take baby steps with you

I don't think I should have to with anyone on DU.

If you can't accept Ralph Nader is essentially a politician who has to appeal to left leaning folks with the meme that the Democrats are no different than the Republicans, there is nothing I can do for you.

Here's a couple articles from 2004 about "Nader Republicans", who mostly gave him money, but wouldn't vote for him. Wonder what their angle was?

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/06/10/nader/

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/09/nader-republicans/3422/

[elleng]

6. 'By what authority?'

http://www.constitution.org/writ/quo_warranto.htm

Love this brilliant man!

[asdjrocky]

8. Watching now. nt

[upi402]

12. Wow, he was right about the modern 2 party system

and he's making a lot of sense. Topic rich interview.

He is saying EXACTLY what I've been saying about controlling our borders and illegal immigration. So edifying!

[elleng]

13. He ALWAYS makes sense, has done so forever!

[AnArmyVeteran]

20. Nader was right in 2000, and he's right now. He was the real deal...

The Green and Reform parties have been the real progressive parties. Nader would have never sold out the people to a corporation. If Obama was smart he would have appointed Nader to a cabinet position in his government to oversee corporate attacks against Americans. Nader has worked his entire life fighting for us and he is one person who cannot be bought. The reason why the two major parties conspired to keep him out of the 2000 debates was because they were terrified of Nader's message. The R and D parties are owned by corporations. Nader would never sell out to corrupt corporations.

I listened to Ralph Nader in 2000 at the University of Houston and he spoke for two hours with no notes and he didn't need trainers and handlers telling him what to say or how to say it. Nader knows what's going on and he is one of the most intelligent people in the country. And he has more ethics than almost everyone in political office in Washington. After his speech he fielded questions (unrehearsed questions) and he answered them without dodging and hemming and hawing like we constantly see from traditional politicians.

Nader was the real deal. And if he was allowed in the 2000 debates he would have done something Gore either couldn't do or wouldn't do, he would have exposed Bush for the corrupt, inept thug he was. Gore sure didn't. In one debate Gore just sat there agreeing with everything Bush said. Nader would have destroyed Bush. Nader said Bush "was a corporation masquerading as a human being". How much clearer can you get? But Gore couldn't say that to Bush because Gore was getting money from the same corrupt corporations Bush was. I'm not saying I don't like Gore, but Nader would have turned this country around. He sure wouldn't have let the republicans water down every progressive bill like Obama and the democrats in congress did.

I don't know why a lot of DUers dump on Nader. Most don't even realize how much of an American treasure he is and what he has done for them. No one in the country has worked as much for progressive causes as Ralph Nader has in his life.

[hfojvt]

15. Is he apologizing?

[upi402]

18. Under weight of current evidence, his detractors need to apologize

.

[hfojvt]

21. so the Bush Presidency wasn't a disaster?

I just dreamed the whole thing up?

[AnArmyVeteran]

23. Nader didn't cause the Bush presidency, Gore and his inept debating and campaigning skills did.

Read what I just posted in this tread.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8858943&mesg_id=8860005


If the democratic party wasn't absolutely terrified of Ralph Nader and if he was 'allowed' to debate he would have destroyed Bush. And the beneficiary of that destruction would have been Gore. But the 'Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD)', a front group for the republican and democratic parties to exclude all others from the political process, didn't want the people to hear TRUE PROGRESSIVE IDEAS FROM NADER. The CPD are OWNED by corporations who knew Nader's ideas and ideals were a great threat to their continued attacks against the American people.

Nader sure would NEVER have given in to the republicans and allowed bill after bill to be watered down by the enemy. He had the balls to tell it like it is and he wouldn't have been terrified as President Obama and the democratic congress was.

[hfojvt]

28. acutally Gore destroyed Bush

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh110204.shtml

"But Drum’s invention of the “schoolmarm chronicles” isn’t his only problem this morning. Is it true that “America was not amused” by Gore’s behavior at that first debate? As we have noted again and again, “America” named Gore the winner of that debate in all five post-debate polls. Indeed, the margins involved weren’t razor-thin; Gore won the five instant polls by an average of just under ten percent (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 9/28/04). Indeed, Drum might have some things to learn if he watched tape of the networks’ post-debate sessions. As we have explained before, dozens of “Americans” were interviewed by the networks that night, and only a tiny few of these people mentioned Gore’s deeply troubling sighs. In fact, more “Americans” stated their objections to Bush’s rude behavior in the debate—his constant statements that Gore was using “phony numbers” and “fuzzy math” (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 5/31/01 and 6/1/01). Indeed, Bush’s rude attacks troubled these “Americans” even before they found out that his attacks had been factually false, that Gore’s “phony numbers” weren’t phony at all, that they’d been perfectly accurate. Of course, most of “America” never heard this explained, because the press corps strangely avoided saying it, and the pleasing tale of Gore’s sighs-and-lies was soon being bruited for all to hear, with loops of his troubling sighs being played—volume cranked for “theatrical” effect, of course. But not until this very day did anyone take this ginned-up story to the place where the “liberal” Drum takes it. Not till today had anyone said it—that Gore not only “theatrically sighed” and “rolled his eyes heavenward” but “periodically crossed the stage to loom over Mr. Bush like an impatient schoolmarm!” Many had said that Gore sighed and lied, and that “America was not amused.” But only this morning does a “liberal” blogger add to the press corps’ treasured myth. By the way, why did the Times print such utter nonsense? Because we prefer to be polite, we’ll assume they were clueless, as always."

[AnArmyVeteran]

34. Sorry, had Gore destroyed Bush, Gore would have won...

When I mentioned Nader destroying Bush I meant just that. Nader would have exposed Bush's inept and corrupt record in Texas. Gore didn't even mention all of the glaring failures when Bush was governor. Gore even allowed Bush to say he was governor of the 'sixth largest economy' etc even though the position of governor in Texas is constitutionally, one of the weakest positions of power in the United States. In Texas, the Lt. Governor is the most powerful position because the Lt Gov controls ALL legislation. But Gore never once confronted Bush on his ridiculous claim.

Bush touted his experience in 'dealing with a foreign country' because Texas was bordered by Mexico, but when Bush was governor he tried to get his corporate buddies to put a toxic waste site right on the border, enraging Mexican leaders. So much for dealing with a 'foreign country'. And Bush did nothing to stop the flow of illegals into the state.

Bush destroyed the educational system and made it a top down organization causing Texas teachers' morale to plummet. While running for office Bush promised to abolish the Texas Education Agency, but when he went into office he staffed it with his stooges and then increased the budget for them so they could further dictate state mandated programs, all of which destroyed teacher morale. Two thirds of Texas teachers vowed to leave education within 3 years. They were also forced to teach the answers to the state mandated TAAS test, instead of being allowed to teach their students. The average Texas teacher had to take $1,000 out of their pockets just to pay for supplies and even to make copies. Texas became number one in the nation in 10th grade dropouts.

Under Bush, Texas government was increased 33 percent in 6 years. So all of that fiscal responsibility Bush was touting was a lie. But Gore didn't expose him.

Under Bush, Texas became #1 in the nation in water, air and soil pollution because Bush gave 830 exemptions to the worst polluters in the state. Those same polluting corporations repaid Bush by buying his elections for him. Because of the rise in pollution, people in Texas with asthma and other respiratory ailments got sicker or even died.

But Gore mentioned NONE of the above. I could have debated Bush and destroyed him, and TRULY destroyed him. And Nader would have absolutely crushed Bush to the point where he would have been a laughingstock.

If I had more time I'd list countless other examples of how Gore FAILED to capitalize off of Bush's inept and corrupt record.

I watched all of the Bush/Gore debates with friends and we all wondered why in the hell isn't Gore exposing all of the things Bush did. Some of us even wondered if Gore was intentionally throwing the election because it was that bad. Gore choked bigtime during the debates. No 'polling data' you can offer can explain why Gore let Bush off the hook so many times or why he didn't expose all of the Bush ineptness and corruption. Because of Gore's pathetic debating skills and non-existent research we ended up with Bush, who did the same things to the country he did to Texas. And everyone was surprised when Bush was a huge failure. It was only a surprise to those who never bothered to check Bush's Texas record, as Gore obviously didn't. If Gore had done his job as a candidate the election wouldn't have been close enough for the supreme court to steal.

What's sad are all the people who blame Ralph Nader for Gore's loss. That's pure lunacy. If Nader was in the debates he would have done what Gore failed to do and the beneficiary of exposing Bush would have been Gore. But the republican and democratic party bosses were terrified of Nader's TRUTHFUL message about corporate corruption in the United States.

[hfojvt]

38. Nader had plenty of opportunites to bash Bush in his speeches

but he aimed his barbs at Gore, because he knew that was where his votes were coming from - the left.

[Better Believe It]

62. And he did. And he did it more effectively than Leiberman/Gore

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

57. Bullshit, Gore won those debates!!!!

The bullshit reich-wing media found ways to tell us why America should not like Al and love Bush. They set the bar so low for Georgie Fuckwad that all the chimp boy had to do was stumble to the mic and not shit himself and he was declared a winner.

The 2000 election was a fraud from start to finish, and the media who hated Clinton but could never touch him even after the Lewinsky coup got their chance to take it out on Gore and make it close enough for the election to be stolen by the SC and the Bush Crime Family.

[EFerrari]

24. When did Ralph get appointed to the Supreme Court? I missed it.

[upi402]

27. Dear Kool Aid drinker; Supreme Court, Choicepoint computer scrub list, Jeb Bush

and Kathleen Harris, the corporate media, and the DLC DCCC crew got away with the betrayal of democracy. Obama is not investigating. The "Democrats" that we gave a majority are doing nothing to reform campaign funding or election reform. You have no government and no party to oppose it's captors.

Enjoy the Kool Aid, maybe it will ease the sting in your backside.

[hfojvt]

29. that's all Florida.

Do I really need to post this again? (Not that anybody is actually clicking on it and reading it)

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/118

Since Kool Aid drinking is associated not so much with loyalty to a party, but loyalty to a chaismatic iconic leader. Perhaps followers of the Reverend Jim Nader could be more accurately characterized as Kool Aid drinkers.

[upi402]

31. Supreme Court, one of 3 branches of government

not based in Florida. Do I really need to educate your type? Would a mountain of evidence falling on you ever unwash your brain? Can you not see that Obama is continuing Bush's paradigm, and only making superficial changes to maintain the facade of democracy?


ugh

[hfojvt]

46. your type?

And just what is my type? Intelligent. Compassionate. Courageous. Informed. Humorous. Supererogatory. and above all modest.

The Supreme Court was deciding something about Florida. Something that would not have been relevant if Gore had won New Hampshire. Something that would have happened had Nader not decided to help elect George W. Bush.

[AnArmyVeteran]

37. Gore voters wasted their votes and defeated Ralph Nader, a REAL progressive.

[hfojvt]

48. try this. If Nader would have defeated Bush if not for Gore

then he should have been able to defeat Gore in the primary. Something he never even tried to do, unlike Jesse Jackson. Sorry, but if Gore had dropped out in October and endorsed Nader then Bush would have won all fifty states (but probably not the District of Columbia). If, otoh, Nader had dropped out in October and endorsed Gore, then our country could have avoided 8 years of bad luck. Or Nader could have kept running, but run his campaign as if it mattered to defeat George W. Bush.

[dionysus]

67. have you been sniffing the pipe dope?

[AnArmyVeteran]

22. Absolutely! Nader has been right all along.

I agree, his detractors should apologize to Ralph Nader, the best progressive this country has ever seen.

[hfojvt]

30. so nice for DUers to be pushing this nonsense right before an election

"Democrats are the same as Republicans"

Therefore "don't vote for them. Just let the Republicans win. It doesn't make any difference."

Funny thing is, I might have agreed with your last line - in 1999.

[upi402]

32. "You're with us or you're against us"?

We want our party back. We refuse to accept the corporate capture of our government. We realize an opposition party is needed or it's all over. There are heroic Dems and they need our strong support.

But those that supplant real Democratic nominees are the real betrayers of democracy. They remove the chance to oppose the powerful forces of corporatism by eliminating a political party opposing it. I do support Democrats that don't vote like Republicans 100%. But if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... must be a duck.

[AnArmyVeteran]

36. Amen upi402, or should it be 'quack' :)

[upi402]

40. lol

:fistbump:
Almost made me drop some fruit in my looms! lol

[hfojvt]

41. sorry, but that is just election math

if the Democrat does not get more votes, then the Republican wins. If you want your party back, then by all means - take it back. Vote in the primary, donate in the primary, run for office in the primary. Too many that I see posting here are not doing anything positive - just always attacking Democrats for perceived or imagined failures. Trying to convince other people to hate the Democratic Party and to support Nader and the Greens instead.

[upi402]

49. the Democrat did get more votes

You haven't read Greg Pallast's book, Best Democracy Money Can Buy?
And people can post here AND do other things. Though DLC, DCCC, and freeper trolls would like them to STFU here.

"Positive" like pretending the government has NOT been captured?
That's foolish, selfish, or evil, not positive.

[hfojvt]

50. positive, like admitting it is important for Republicans to be defeated

So the government has been captured? What, then, is the plan to recapture it? Does it involve claiming that Democrats and Republicans are equivalent and then not voting in the fall? Because that is just about all I see posted here.

Tell me, does everybody who disagrees with you have to be evil, to be some kind of troll?

I rejoined this board after the 2004 election because I wanted to have some way to cope. To get together with like-minded people and make plans to stop the Bush administration and to defeat Republicans in 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2012. Now, because our victories in 2006 and 2008 have not accomplished all that much, it seems like some people do not care if Republicans are going to win in 2010. In fact, they are looking forward to a Republican victory that they can blame on the DLC.

When it comes to accomplishments though, it can be hard to tell. If Gore had been President in March of 2003 I could just see DU complaining about what a bad job he was doing. We would, of course, have no way of knowing that the alternative would have been an invasion of Iraq.

[EFerrari]

33. It's the first of August. n/t

[hfojvt]

42. and I have an election in two days (or is it one now?)

and really, three months is nothing in terms of time. If I wanted to demoralize the other side, I would certainly start early and keep repeating the message.

[EFerrari]

44. The American attention span is minutes long. You'd be wasting your time.

Relax. Ralph isn't running this time.

[hfojvt]

45. I think that's kinda naive

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/60

Because the more you plant a seed, the more it will resonate with each repetition. They hear it and forget it, but it stays in their head and when they think about an issue, then Republican talking points and Republicans frames are already planted in their heads and will guide their thoughts. The more they hear "Democrats and Republicans are the same" the more they will think "Why bother to vote?" even if they don't remember WHY they feel that voting is not worth the trouble. Ralph is not running, but Republicans are, and we need voters to be motivated to defeat them. Unless we don't mind having Republicans in charge.

[AnArmyVeteran]

I didn't say they were the same.

One is corporate-owned, the other corporate-lite. I also didn't say it didn't make any difference. But why should we vote for a person who 'says' the right things about being a progressive, and then does the opposite when he gets elected?

The only way to make democratic officeholders do what they 'said' they were going to do is to hold their goddamned feet to the fire. Otherwise they will continue to cave in, compromise and give up. Sorry, but I am tired of being used. No person and no party automatically has my vote. I have a brain and I use it.

I understand and appreciate what you are saying, but unless we all FORCE our leaders to do the right thing, they will continue to cave-in to the 'right wing thing'. If our leaders actually read DU and other progressive forums and all they saw were cheerleaders for their party do you think they would do anything we wanted? If they read our comments and got worried about where our votes might actually go THEN they would start to represent us, and ONLY then...

[hfojvt]

43. what you said was that "Nader was right"

and what Nader said was that "There is not a dime's worth of difference" as in "they are the same"

Logically, if ther are the same then it does not matter if Republicans are defeated by Democrats.

cheerleading is not the only alternative to bashing.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/127

"Look, I share a desire to move both Obama and the Democratic Party to the left. I really do, but I don't think a strategy of constantly castigating them for not being progressive enough is a way to accomplish that. I think that if people came to DU and got information, they might walk away thinking "wow, single payer really is better" or "wow, Reaganomics really does suck (if I may put forward my own not so humble attempts in this regard http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/126). Instead they walk away thinking things like "wow, Obama and Democrats really do suck (thus why bother electing them)" or "wow, liberals really are arrogant and hateful". It seems to me we are our own worst enemy in moving the country in the right direction."

[AnArmyVeteran]

35. duplicate

[slay]

58. +1

some real Nader haters in this thread - least there are some intelligent people who realize Nader was right as well. We all owe Nader an apology - those of us who wrote him off, like i'm sad to admit i did. Least I am big enough to admit when i'm wrong. Nader was and is right about so many things.

[Raineyb]

25. What for? He's OWED the apology not the other way around.

I shan't hold my breath waiting for you to do so however.

[AnArmyVeteran]

39. I like your post and your tagline...

If a company is too big to fail it's too big to exist -Senator Bernie Sanders
Enforce the Sherman Antitrust Act!

Amen!

[Raineyb]

68. Thank you kindly. n/t

[EFerrari]

16. I always forget how brilliant he is.

The media cartoon interferes.

[howaboutme]

19. We need far more like Ralph Nader

and far less of what we currently have. That would be CHANGE I could believe in.

I agree with Nader that corporatization (of both Parties) is the problem. Most have become prostitutes to the oligarchy instead of serving the people.

[AnArmyVeteran]

26. He's been saying that all his life. I wish Gore didn't take away Nader votes!

At least Nader would have actually debated Bush, because Gore sure didn't. And a President Nader would have turned our country around and exposed all of the corporate corruption in our quickly declining country. But because he wasn't funded and owned by corporations people refused to listen to him.

The definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. If Nader was elected, we would have gotten DIFFERENT RESULTS!

[roxiejules]

51. Agreed

I couldn't bear to vote for the same-ole anymore...my vote went to Nader. I knew he would be the only one who would fight the corporate takeover of our country.

[dionysus]

69. dude couldn't get elected dogcatcher. it's all about feeding his massive ego. guy fucking sucks.

[roxiejules]

52. Just watched the re-broadcast on Book TV

Absolutely great interview - thank you for posting the notice.

[roxiejules]

53. Here is the link to watch the broadcast

http://www.booktv.org/Program/11751/In+Depth+Ralph+Nader.aspx

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RufusTFirefly]

55. Indeed he was. And all the belly-aching divide-and-conquer talking points...

... aren't going to change that.

I am a life-long Democrat. I licked envelopes for McCarthy, campaigned mightily for McGovern, and worked the phones for Mondale and Kerry. In between all that, I worked hard for Democratic candidates at the local level throughout that entire period.

And yet I know lame loser tactics when I see them.

Instead of demonizing Nader, the Democratic Party should've listened to him. He was a great big warning sign that the Democratic Party was losing its core supporters. Forgetting for a moment -- this is the United States of Amnesia, after all -- that Bush stole not one but two elections, Nader wouldn't have had any traction if it weren't for the fact that the Democratic Party -- my Democratic Party -- abandoned its base and sold its soul to the DLC and corporate America.

I'll repeat. I didn't vote for Nader, but I respected his efforts to prod the Democratic Party to move back to its democratic wing.

My party didn't listen, and we are paying the price.

[howaboutme]

60. A bankster hijacking

The Democratic Party was once the Party of working Americans. That changed when the unions were sold out, when our jobs were sold to China, and when the Wall Street banksters bought the Party.