I don't think it matters that Ralph Nader's running. It didn't matter in 2004. How many people even remember he ran in 2004? So it's silly to make a big issue of it. At this point, Ralph's just in it for the chicks... or the dudes... always hard to tell with him. But, there can be no doubt, he's got a point about how narrow our presidential debates have become. He's the wrong messenger, because even most of the people who used to like him now hate him, but no candidate is talking about single payer health care, which 59 percent of doctors support. No candidate dares talk about cutting the bloated military budget. Gun control. A carbon tax. Gay marriage. Cloning supermodels. We won't have a debate about any of these things. That's bad for the country, isn't it? In fact, isn't Ralph Nader's platform still the best one? Couldn't Barack Obama, with all his political gifts, be borrowing more from Nader's platform? That would be real change.
I really hate to say it but ever since the writer's struck I have found your timing off and your ability to appeal to a wide progressive base skewed. That makes me very sad for even though I think some of your Libertarian ideas are uncultured and idiotic, I still like you and like is a dangerous thing. My Music Theory teachers always said that you should distrust music that you "like". It will probably turn out to be trash in the long run. Please get back on point. Find your way back to serious panels and leave those cloying conservative hacks to their proper place in their fancy poorly translated limited "great books" libraries. But most of all, renew your talent and stop selling your considerable skills for trinkets and trash. You, Black and Stewart are all we have. We need you. REH
Can't we clone something with some beef on it?
Obama (and I am pretty sure Clinton for that matter, though as I am an Obama supporter I am not a frequent visitor to her rallies) regularly addresses many of the issues you raise, with the possible exception of cloning super models (though, I wouldn't be surprised if cloning and the ethics thereof have been raised), during his many rallies, speeches, town halls, and other interactions with voters.
Now, if you mean that these questions are not raised during the MSNBC or CNN Debates -- well, that may be, but I really don't think you get much value out of those anyhow.
Nader could be a powerful voice if that is what he really sought to be, but that is not what he wants; he wants attention. If he was seeking to establish a viable third party challenge, he would not pursue this through a presidential run - he would shot for a senatorial or house seat, and use his profile to encourage and support others to do likewise. This would build a constituency within the legislature, and build a foundation for a real third party. If he wanted to promote alternative solutions, he would engage with the leadership of both parties (though he would have far better luck with the dems) and pursue an incrementalist approach to many of his objectives, gaining traction, and succeeding in making a real impact.
But he didn't want to do either of these things. Senator wasn't high profile enough, it wouldn't give him the national stage he sought; and he doesn't want to compromise - he is as much a bully as Bush is - it just happens that many of the things he wants to bully bout are less objectionable - but he is still a bully and if you don't agree with him then you are vilified - you're a corporate sellout or worse.
He doesn't want a debate either Bill.
We all need to let go of the image of the Nader that was, and see the Nader that is - he is no longer the noble crusader working for us; he is a selfish, petty man desperate to claim whatever significance he can at whatever cost.
In a recent interview with NPR he was asked "if the majority of people, like 90%, said they would prefer you not run, would you then step aside?" His response was telling..."No, because its not about them. It's not about the voters. People don't know what they want or what they need..." He was called on this by the interviewer because he contradicted earlier statements, but he just kept going, and then came out with the selfish truth..."they talk a lot about the voters, and the rights of voters, but no one ever talks about the rights of candidates, and my right as a candidate...this is about candidate rights..."
There ya have Bill, Nader's true crusade is for himself. He was a great man...emphasis on 'was'.
Years of the same ole same ole. Korea, Viet Nam, Central America, Iraq.... Democrats have been in charge or complicit on all of these.
Still no single payer health care....
Don't reward the Democrats for manipulation and lying...
Vote Nader!
Does it not speak about how "dumbed down", spoiled and hypocratic the society has become?
Isn't the lack of adequate progress is actually the sign of stagnation?
The early debates were great. All the candidates, all the spread of perspectives and ideas, we were so rich. Now, not so much. We need fair debates.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
Show your support. Get yours today!
http://www.cafepress.com/o_yes_we_can
Wow
Tenzin Gyatso 08!
I live in Germany, and about 40 percent of my income goes to taxes. All I get for that is (for example) universal health care (which saved my life without demanding that I justify it first), a working public transportation system (you complain about three dollars a gallon, well here they are paying upwards of $7.50, which doesn't interest me, because I'm not forced to own a car), a free university education, basic pothole repair, and bridges that don't fall in rivers. I complain a lot about the German sense of entitlement (for example that people get paid money just for having kids), but no one here has to be afraid of getting sick or going hungry, and if Katrina had happened here, people would be talking about it in the past tense.
People here would take to the streets if they were getting as little for their money as Americans do. 'Ask not what your country can do for you' is a crock. We pay them to do for us. It's time we started demanding it.
One of the great falsehoods perpetrated on the American public is the belief you have freedom of speech, etc. Only from government intrusion, if the balancing test runs in your favor -- but losing your job for speech is not consitutionally forbidden.
Could it be that America's failure to ensure that all of its citizens are insured, even though most people want universal healthcare, might just be undemocratic?
I lived in New Jersey for many years...roads full of potholes, no public transport, filthy cities, assholes everywhere etc etc cost: 39.6% Federal Tax, 6.6% NJ State tax, Property tax $2,200 per month (Westfield NJ)...
It's a no brainer....
Clinton on Iraq --- Continue the War
McCain on Iraq --- Continue the War
NADER ON IRAQ --- IMMEDIATE, SAFE WITHDRAWAL OF ALL US TROOPS AND CONTRACTORS
Obama on Health Care -- No Single Payer, Universal Health Care
Clinton on Health Care -- No Single Payer, Universal Health Care
McCain on Health Care -- No Single Payer, Universal Health Care
NADER ON HEALTH CARE -- SINGLE PAYER, UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE
Obama on Free Trade -- Supported Extending NAFTA to Peru
Clinton on Free Trade -- Supported Extending NAFTA to Peru
McCain on Free Trade -- Supported Extending NAFTA to Peru
NADER ON FREE TRADE -- Repeal NAFTA and No More Trade Agreements Without Labor and Environmental Protections
Nader is an egomaniac for running as there"s no difference between him, Obama or Clinton. He"s just a spoiler. NOT!!!. If you're supporting Obama or Clinton you're supporting unbridled free trade, never-ending killing and maiming of our young and Iraqis and health care policy by health insurance companies. If you're supporting one of them, you're a warmongerer trying to ignore that reality.
If the Dems want Nader to be ignored, adopt the Democratic Platform he's running on.
Otherwise Nader for President.
Nader is the reason we have Bushit PERIOD. You can try to justify that in your little world all you like, but its the FACT.
Nader ceased to be relevant a LOONG time ago, now it's all about his ego.
The egotist who gave us the Bush/Nader Supreme Court. And the Bush/Cheney/Nader Iraq War.
No Nader, no Bush. That's the truth. And people pulled into this Nader ego trip are political dummies.
The NEW NADER IS OBAMA.
The NANNY STATE FOR THE RICH & "corporate welfare queens" OWNS AMERICAN MEDIA.
THEY allow Bush-Cheney's high crimes, unaccoutability, irresponsibility--on THEIR behalf.
Get used to being screwed in the America of the NANNY STATE FOR THE RICH or VOTE THEM OUT as soon as possible. Or you and your family WILL crash into an ash heap because you'll have no money, no security and no rights whatsoever in the NANNY STATE FOR THE RICH.
Republicans can hardly wait for you to dump on H.Clinton--who can actually slap them down--
so they can will against Obama.
Bill Maher lost an avid fan last night.
I'm not a feminist, but that exhibition of misogyny and downright nastiness literally turned my stomach.
You've let yourself down badly, Bill. I cannot find it in my heart to defend you this time.
As for Hitchens... he is a broken record blah blah blah ....surely there are others more interesting that will agree to appear on Real Time......
The ricin found in Las Vegas were castor beans and a vial of powder, according to CNN.
NOT gas.