Blogs and Stories
The Man Cheering Obama's Health-Care Woes
Jacquelyn Martin / AP Photo
The left's anger over the public option and the anti-Obama revolt is long overdue, says Ralph Nader. Benjamin Sarlin talks to the self-professed "pioneer" of the current progressive rage.
Democrats are steaming over the White House’s capitulation to liberal nemesis Joe Lieberman’s demands to remove a public option and Medicare buy-in from the Senate’s heath-care bill. Progressive figures including Howard Dean and Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas have gone so far as to suggest scrapping the bill entirely and starting over, sparking rebukes from White House officials like David Axelrod, who called such a move “insane” in a Morning Joe interview on MSNBC on Thursday. With polls already showing many Democrats planning on sitting out 2010 midterms, the conflict has drawn comparisons to Ralph Nader’s third-party run in 2000, which many Democrats blame for tipping the election to George W. Bush—and for leaving Lieberman to wreak havoc in the Senate.
This is all good news to Nader, a vocal critic of the bill who considers the health-care debate a turning point in the left’s relationship to Obama.
“This is what I meant a year ago when I said the next year will determine whether Barack Obama will be an Uncle Tom groveling before the demands of the corporations.”
The four-time presidential candidate said he was particularly encouraged Thursday morning, when he read Dean’s op-ed in The Washington Post.
“Good for Howard Dean,” Nader said, adding that his only criticism was the former Democratic National Committee chairman didn’t go after the bill hard enough.
• Dana Goldstein: Howard Dean Splits the Left Nader favors a single-payer health-care system, but said he objected in particular to the Senate bill for many of the same reasons expressed by Dean. He reserved his harshest criticism for the individual mandate, which commentators like Ezra Klein say is necessary in some form to keep premiums at acceptable rates but which Nader says forces Americans to buy substandard insurance.
“It doesn’t have a drug-reimportation provision, it doesn’t have a public option, it doesn’t have a Medicare buy-in, and in the House they lost a number of provisions,” he said. “Basically it’s a massive new subsidy to the health-insurance industry to deliver millions of customers, including those who will be forced to buy junk insurance policies.”
Proponents of the bill have noted that many Americans with preexisting conditions will no longer be barred from purchasing insurance, putting a stop to one of the most reviled practices under the current system. Nader said he believes the bill still doesn’t go far enough to protect Americans from discrimination, citing Dean’s argument in his op-ed that even though those with preexisting conditions might benefit, insurance companies could still charge older customers rates up to three times higher than younger ones.
Nader instead recommended that legislators and the White House scrap the bill entirely and embark on a nationwide tour to generate grassroots support for single-payer health care, which they would then attempt to pass through reconciliation, which requires only a bare majority in the Senate. Given the narrow margins for even the House bill, which requires only a majority to pass, the prospect seems politically unthinkable—but Nader insists that it could be done.
“You go all out, you use your evidence, you put your human-interest stories in the papers, the people who are suffering, who’ve been denied benefits, who were told they couldn’t get into the hospital without writing a huge check first, and you lead! You lead!” he said, his voice rising to a shout.
Nader, who has been viciously critical of Obama since before his inauguration, said he was encouraged to see many of the president’s campaign allies beginning to turn on his agenda.
10 Power Food Combos
Divya Gugnani is the CEO and founder of BehindtheBurner.com, an emerging culinary media brand that creates expert-based content about food, wine, mixology, and nutrition.
How Barack Beat Bibi
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, will be published by HarperCollins in June. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook.
Do These Numbers Add Up?
Benjamin Sarlin is Washington correspondent for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Making Stupak Pay
Benjamin Sarlin is Washington correspondent for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Health Care's Last Holdout
Benjamin Sarlin is Washington correspondent for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
JayGetty
very interesting, almost!
case1234
Why are so many on the left OK with righteous defeat. So if they add the PO back in the bill HOW DOES it PASS? The media will characterize reconciliation as Heresy. Kill this bill and we won't get another opportunity for yet another 15 years. Many representatives are more concerned with getting reelected that providing insurance options to 40 million people. -- imagine that, and many of them are already millionaires.
Read Paul Krugmans NYT article.
doorworker
One person's "righteous defeat" mirrors another's "pyrrhic victory".
This mandate is bad bad news, and it's not at all clear that the pre-compromised--again (single payer) & again (pub op open to everyone) & again (pub op tied to Medicare prices) & again (opt-out pub op) & again (55 and up Medicare buy in)--corporate-friendly approach is yielding anything that Congress will be able to run on next year. It stinks of failure and capitulation, and it'll be super easy for attack ads to seel it as a corporate bailout.
I'm a progressive Obama voter, and it looks to me like a poorly-disguised bailout. Maybe it's got worthwhile virtues aside from that (like, health care related virtues), but you could say the same about TARP and the bank bailouts. but I don't guess anyone's going to run too hard on the popularity of those.
This '11th dminsional chess' stuff has, across the board, at a minimum confused lots of low-info voters who went for Obama in '08. When people get confused, they get scared, especially during hard times. Confused voters like these will be the first to stay home next election day. And for those that keep paying their little bit of attention...playing to fear is what the GOP was born to do.
I don't see this as 'pragmatism' vs 'pie in the sky' at all. Regardless of what Krugman says.
ndspinelli
One need not read Krugman to know what he will say on virtually every topic. He's as predictable as taxes[pun intended].
HiMomItsMe
here's what i don't understand about all the "Bill, Baby, Bill!" zealots:
what "opportunity" are you talking about?
how does a useless bill benefit ANYONE?
jus1drun
i lost my scorecard, maybe someone could get me up to speed. i know the dems have started to eat their own but i'm not sure who is coming out on top.
sonofloud
you prefer blind obedience?
HumanityCritic
No one is talking about blind obedience. But there is a difference of holding the President accountable, and petulance.
nightdragon09
jus1drun... funny enough, it's the "tea-baggers" who have "come out on top" according to the latest NBC/WSJ poll... oh the irony!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34451672/ns/politics-white_house/
"The entire Republican Party, moreover, continues to maintain a net-negative favorable/unfavorable rating, 28 percent to 43 percent.
But, for the first time in more than two years, the Democratic Party also now holds a net-negative rating, 35 percent to 45 percent.
By comparison, the conservative libertarian-leaning Tea Party movement has a net-positive 41 percent to 23 percent score in the poll."
jus1drun
so perhaps a third party effort could keep the dems on top? that would be hilarious given the dems' suicidal emersion in health reform. in the meantime the unemployed sit on the bench waiting to get in the game.
Desertpenguin
The Health Reform Bill debate reminds of the fable of the frog captured and put in a pan of hot water.
When the frog prostested the guy who captured him said I'm only going to turn the heat up one degree, you'll like it.
The frog agreed to this (I said it was a fable).
Eventually, after many one-degree-at-a-times, the frog got boiled.
The Health Reform Bill is the frog and sooner or later,
everything that people originally wanted in it will come to pass,
one degree at a time.
jarussell
Ahh, the nader returns, just in time to proclaim his own magnificence and to say 'I told you a long time ago this was.....'
What a complete waste of air and food this guy is.
The be-all see-all of everything, nader is a doddering old fool who delights in not DOING anything, but being the one moron in every crowd who STOPS things from happening.
It doesn't matter if it's for the good or bad, as long as the nader sees his name in the lights, he's sure he's accomplished something, something wonderful and brilliant, something no one else could have ever done.
In his own mind, the nader holds "...the burden of a pioneer."
" '....you lead, you lead!' he said, his voice rising to a shout."
How the hell would you know? What've you ever lead?
There's no fool like an old fool.
linuxmill
In what kind of world do you attempt to nullify the single steady voice of sanity that most accurately espouses your true views?
Jarussell, and all those who think like you: You will continue to get your Obamas and Liebermans forever and you deserve the results they deliver.
It's not about Nader and never was. Even for Nader.
jarussell
HAHAHAHAHA
linuxmill, you made my night with a belly laugh!
'It's not about Nader and never was..."
Did you read the article? Can you see his quotes?
It's about nothing BUT nader, always has been always will be.
The man is an egomaniac the likes of Napolean, Mao, and Dick Cheyney.
If it was about anything other than ralph, why won't he talk about it?
baptox
jarusssell, Even egomaniacs can be right. And Ralph Nader was and is right. But stupid egomaniacs like you are never right.
Ralph Nader has done more to benefit humanity than you could do in forty lifetimes.
jarussell
OMG, you're soo right!
I'm sorry I didn't see it sooner, that Nader IS the god-like character you've assigned such such impotance to.
And even though I'm an egomaniac, I think you're impotant too.
Nader gave us a second coming of Bush, that's what he did for humanity.
"Even egomaniacs can be right." Correct! According to him (and you, his fan club) he's ALWAYS right.
Congratulations, you're the fucking moron of the century.
PROgressing
jarussel, face it, Bush stole the election, and Gore just rolled over and gave it to him. Whatever fraction of the already tiny fraction of 90,000 votes Nader got in Florida would have otherwise, in some parallel universe without a Ralph Nader, gone to Gore, would just have been that many more votes for the neocon coupsters and Diebold to "lose" and switch. You do realize there was an active coup that the brave democratic party basically allowed and even validated, don't you??? Oh, but it's so much easier to drag out the tired old scapegoat than to confront the real culprits. You're clinging to a myth promoted by democratic party cowards who'd rather use Nader as a scapegoat to divert outrage away from the actual coup leaders and participants (who are still embedded in our electoral system) and toward someone who can't fight back.
After watching another "sensible centrist" democratic administration completely sell out to the corporate elite, and in the process, snatch political defeat from the jaws of victory, I'd take Nader's self righteous piety over the democratic party leadership's sniveling, bribe grubbing, cowardice, any day.
pwlthtt35
Jarussell:
Ah -- you said it so-oooo well. "A complete waste of air" what an appropriate description. But for a moment I thought you were talking about McCain -- particularly on your last line.
CrissieP
amen - I still have a lot of respect for Nader but it is long past the time when he should have exited gracefully from the stage.
theletterb
jarussell:
what are you talking about?
Safe Drinking Water Act, OSHA, EPA, National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, Freedom of Information Act, Consumer Product Safety. If you drink water, work, breathe, drive or expect a government to be held accountable to its citizens you owe ralph nader a debt of gratitude. Or is his involvement (and for some cases the catalyst) in the aforementioned yet another example of someone who "delights in not DOING anything, but being the one moron in every crowd who STOPS things from happening. " ?
Get the nine year old bile out of your throat and blame the 48% of the country that voted for george bush 2000, or the 51% who voted for him in 2004. Blaming a lifelong consumer advocate who chose to run for president for the atrocities of the bush administration is not only foolish, it removes the responsibility from where it belongs: the bush administration.
whipmawhopma
It's amazing that the most honest of the bunch are the ones that are never going to get in power, Hmmm, I take that back. It's not amazing.
amanda07070
My sentiments exactly!
Chuckv
It is a tragedy that all the good Nader did earlier in his life was hardly equal to the harm he did by running for president and giving the election to Bush.
He is a poster child for the adage "The best is the enemy of the good." He tries to tear apart anything that does not pass his own personal test for perfection, and to hell with anything else--the public be damned.
Someone should teach him to fish and move him to Montana.
cigi63
Chucky, right on! Nader needs to STFU! Had he thrown his support to Gore, we wouldn't be in two war fronts today, suffering from the meltdown of our economy, or watching the Dems "act like they are in the minority." Nader set this country back 30 years with his own ego and self grandizement in his own head...the legend in his mind!
sharonsj
Actually it was the Supreme Court that gave the election to Bush, and after that it was the rigged voting machines.
Nader is one of the few honest people we have in this country. No wonder he didn't get elected.
oracle
check out a site called Ralph Nader's Skeleton closet or a well sourced 2000 Salon article on allegations of stock manipulation, union busting, etc by Nader - then decide if he's so squeaky clean - or go to New England and look at some of the property he owns -
baptox
Don't forget katherine Harris...
menckenlite
Nader is diabolical. He gave the election to Bush, but look at what Bush inherited? Bush had those albatrosses around his neck for 8 long years, and didn't complain about or blame Clinton once. Bush passed those heavy birds on to Obama who is whining like a stuck pig. Poor Obama. The only President to inherit problems with his Presidency. It is not well-known outside of Cambridge MA, but Harvard Law Professors Wilkinson, and Tribe promised Obama an easy Presidency with lots of TV appearances and trips to exotic lands. Barry fears blaming his Harvard enablers for their failure to perform, so he blames Bush. Is he a genius or what? How many times did he blink his eyes on Sunday's 60 Minutes show?
balanced-being
What albatrosses? Clinton left the country in fine financial shape and avoided war at least twice. H. L. Mencken was smart and witty. Lite is neither.
slippery57
Menckenlite, huh? more like 'Mencken-free' - all the text with none of the intelligence!
Clinton was no prize, but exactly which problems are you considering Albatrosses? The positive cash flow, the warnings months in advance of terrorist plots...
Face it, for all the damage Clinton did (NAFTA comes to mind), Bush and Cheney _destroyed_ the country .
Obama is no better - he's been convinced by the leftovers from the previous administration that Guantanamo is a good idea, spying on citizens is okay and contuining to bail out the idiots on wall street is good for the country.
Nader should STFU, he seems to have forgotten his hands have blood on them too.
blahblahblahblah
you should check your statistics before mouthing an opinion. nader actually pulled more votes from the republicans than the democrats in the infamous elections. dems need to stop beating the drum about something that happened almost 10 years ago. the point is that bit by bit they are coping out to insurance companies, republican demands and all other nay sayers of single payer health plan. this despite the fact that both clinton and esp. obama ran on this issue during election.... it doesn't matter if its nader or dean or anyone else who brings these facts to light... facts are facts
Leprekike
Let's be realistic about this. Nader isn't the reason why the Dems lost to a weak Bush...an even weaker Kerry ran against him. Asking for Swiss cheese on his Philly cheesesteak? Come on, man! Horseface couldn't have won the race even if he was the only candidate running and we were all required by law to vote for him. Stop blaming Nader for an incomplete, illogical, ill-informed Democratic platform that couldn't get even one of the two buffoons elected in back-to-back elections for prez.
ccrider27
So support for Nadar sent the election to the Supreme Court which anointed Bush. But now we have the 'savior' and what does he do? Continues all of the old Bush policies: war, illegal search and seizure, illegal wiretaps, no roll-back for tax cuts for the wealthy, no windfall profit tax on big oil, refuses to release info on Bush torture or wire taps, protects Cheney, Rove, et al., and on and on and on.
What do you not get about this? Nadar was exactly right. There's NO DIFFERENCE (except possibly some of the rhetoric). The Green Party can make the Democrats steer left just like the Libertarian Party made Repugs steer right.
Your alternative makes Madame Pelosi exactly right when she says that progressives can be ignored because 'they have no place else to go.' Well guess what, we do have some where else to go because of Ralph Nadar. Quit reflexively believing whatever so-called 'progressive' pundits tell you and start using your own brains.
HiMomItsMe
A post.
the only solution for americans right now, no matter how much the DNC/RNC tries to scare you into compliance, is to take the leap of courage and vote EXCLUSIVELY for alternate party candidates, EVEN IF a democrat (or republican) candidate is "theoretically" better.
there may be a place for the DNC again in the future, but NOT until this two party corporate chokehold has been broken and some sort of accountability is restored.
the PEOPLE need to take back this country, and I'm sorry to rain on anyone's grand old donkey love parade, but that will NEVER happen until republicans and democrats are BOTH minority parties.
oracle
from Salon 2000 - "In a June interview with the Washington Post about his millionaire earnings -- much of which he has donated to his public interest groups -- Nader said the stocks he chose were "the most neutral-type companies ... No. 1, they're not monopolists and No. 2, they don't produce land mines, napalm, weapons."
But this is not true. The Fidelity Magellan fund owns 777,080 shares of Raytheon, a major missile manufacturer. And this isn't the only example of his rhetoric not matching up with his financial investments.
"I'm quite aware of how the arms race is driven by corporate demands for contracts, whether it's General Dynamics or Lockheed Martin," Nader told the Progressive in April. "They drive it through Congress. They drive it by hiring Pentagon officials in the Washington military industrial complex, as Eisenhower phrased it." The Fidelity Magellan fund owns 2,041,800 shares of General Dynamics. "
HiMomItsMe
"A " post : "A plus" - do plus signs not show up in comments?
Reason
Nader may be right on how HC should be managed in this country, but the far left will NEVER come to power in the US. Like it or not, we have a 2 party system that is so entrenched that any third party has exactly 0 chance of unseating either the Dems or the Repubs. What Nader fails to recognize is that being correct does not equate to being elected.
Liberals need to learn a lesson on unity from conservatives. When the tea partiers first got going they were libertarians with real concerns about the direction of the country. The republicans glommed onto (and largely co-opted) the movement for their own political purposes. Now, regardless of the ideological differences within the right-wing, they remain unified against the same enemy... the (socialist, Marxist, fascist, blah, blah, blah"ist") liberal left.
Meanwhile, the left is ripping into itself and losing anything good it had going. Nader, Dean, Olbermann, Shultz and the others need to get with the program. Yes, this HC bill is a ghost of what it could have been. Yes, it fails to provide the competition we need to keep the HCI honest. Yes, the mandate without sufficient consumer protections is bad, but I have to ask, if we kill this bill and fracture the left even more than it already is, what will happen to the country when the right regains several seats in both the house and senate in 2010?
Rather than cannibalizing itself, the left needs to unify, get all the good they can in this bill (get rid of the mandate and, if possible, add back the medicare buy-in and buying drugs from other countries) and hammer home the message of corporate greed, denial of coverage and huge profit margins in the for-profit insurance market. This is the time for all on the left and center to come together and play hardball with the right-wing corporate interests.
We must not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
HiMomItsMe
"hammer home the message of corporate greed, denial of coverage and huge profit margins in the for-profit insurance market"
absolutely. we must do this.
"left and center to come together and play hardball with the right-wing corporate interests"
the last time i checked, most of our elected "left and center" democrats were just as captured by corporate interests as the "right-wing" republicans are.
"We must not let the perfect be the enemy of the good"
i must respectfully disagree with the concept of striving toward unity under a false flag, for the sole purpose of achieving unity under a flag.
Reason
Respectfully, do you remember the 8 years under Bush?
I know many of the Dems are owned and operated by special interests... hell, they are politicians. Fish swim, politicians sell out.
Our representative republic is really only representative of whatever will secure re-election... no matter matter how flawed that may be, it is what it is.
When I use the phrase, "We must not let the perfect be the enemy of the good" it is only to illustrate that with all of the special interests and backroom deals that are made in Washington, there is no perfect, but some incremental good can come out of this mess if we hold our ground.
HiMomItsMe
"Respectfully, do you remember the 8 years under Bush?"
1) progress envisions the future not the past; 2) please explain how this year was different, i must have missed something
"but some incremental good can come out of this mess if we hold our ground"
i believe we are both on the same side, fighting for the people and for human rights. so here's what i don't understand about all the "Bill, Baby, Bill!" zealots:
what "opportunity" are you talking about?
how does a useless bill benefit ANYONE?
HiMomItsMe
"Our representative republic is really only representative of whatever will secure re-election"
and what secures re-election 99% of the time? a primary allegiance to party interests, with a secondary allegiance to constituency interests thrown in for good measure. THAT is the dynamic you're voting for when you vote democrat or republican today.
this "health care" bill is as meaningless as a nobel peace prize
oracle
" Any government intrusion into the economy deters the alleged beneficiaries from voicing their views or participating in civic life." Ralph Nader 1962? libertarian or progressive - just saw this along with links to Ralph Nader Skeleton Closet and a 2000 Salon article about stock manipulation and investments by him - very interesting - union busting for his staffers as well - at least there appears to be no heir apparent to the phony legacy -
bryanlevi
Well said Chuckv.
Nader is quite possibly the only person I despise more than Lieberman. The healthcare bill is an absolute disaster. But Nader's poison on society is also a disaster. He is a preening, malicious egomaniac just like Lieberman.
PROgressing
What is this mythical "harm"???? It exists only in the minds of democrats who cling to their need for a scape goat to take the blame off of Gore's pathetic failure of leadership in the face of a coup. Whatever fraction of a fraction of Nader votes could have hypothetically gone to Gore would have just been that many more votes "lost" or switched. Do you Nader haters realize that the 2000 election was actively stolen?????
sonofloud
Nader as usual speaks the truth but please Ralph, find someone else to run for your party that you can support.
Someone younger who doesn't have all your baggage but unlike Obama, someone with actual experience.
HumanityCritic
Didn't Nader once call Obama an "Uncle Tom"? Ahh, the wise one returns!
sonofloud
Yes, there are a few of us who have seen Obama for what he actually is since the beginning but you can't listen to anything we say because we are......racists.
eurydice9276
Now I remember why I kept voting for the guy. I think his time has passed, but we really need some other voices out there.
HumanityCritic
@sonofloud
"Yes, there are a few of us who have seen Obama for what he actually is since the beginning but you can't listen to anything we say because we are......racists."
I've always thought that people who bitch about being called "racist" without anyone ever charging them with such, is probably racist. That said, how many crypto republicans posing as progressives actually think that people are actually buying their weak antics. You voted for McCain last year, you aren't fooling anyone motherfucker.
waldo3k
Nasty, irrelevant comments aside, four days, or even four weeks of Ralph Nader in the White House is better than four years of anyone else being there, especially if you happen not to be a member of the plutocracy being served by the incumbent Republicrat monopoly party. News that the "tea parties" are now garnering one-third in the polls, and that some 47% of Americans disapprove of where the nation is going ratify this.
Regarding Obama's failed leadership on health care and the economy, if a President cannot lead, cannot educate those he serves, he should resign instead of caving in, again, to the special interests.
It's difficult to understand exactly whom Obama thinks will be voting for his pals in Congress next year, or for him in 3 years: Mitch McConnell Republicans and Democrat Blue Dogs? I don't think so. Time to make peace with, and invite some of your supporters into the White House instead of continuing to make back door deals with the Fortune 500 and their pals who represent the minority in Congress. Time to lead or get out of the way. New parties and new people are coming soon to start really representing a new government of, by and for the people instead of the same old profiteering corporations and their pals in Congress who have destroyed our country and its government in the last 40 years.
HumanityCritic
Douchey, asinine, and retarded comments aside - anyone who co-signs the incoherent ramblings of Ralph Nader is indeed a product of inbreeding.
neverlate
When that which should be subject to pragmatic analysis (health care) becomes hostage to some phony moral litmus test (Public Option?), you have the perfect argument for limited government.
sebastianAugustus
I'm soooo unhappy with the Democrats...but I'll draw the line at Ralph Nader. I don't want to be anywhere near him.
His "purity" gave us Bush, and all the misery that came with him. That Nader still doesn't get that this kind of self-righteousness has consequences is one of the reasons why the "left" in this country is just as dangerous as the hard right. More so.
HollyK64
Without tort control this health care reform is a joke. Obama doesn't want to go up against the lawyers who helped get him elected so this was a exercise in futility from the start. Worse is the section of the bill demanding people buy health insurance. If Obama thinks that's something that Americans will just go along with he's in for a rude awakening. In this country people don't like being told what to do, especially when it's the elite "haves" doing the telling.
nightdragon09
Exactly Holly... it's like with auto insurance... states require you by law to have insurance if you own a car, but there are plenty of people who drive around without insurance simply because they can't afford it, or because they have a "pre-existing condition" which drives their premiums up (no pun intended) or in some extreme cases completely bars them from being able to purchase insurance.
Simply forcing people to buy health insurance when they can't afford it as it is while making it MORE expensive for just about everyone who already has health insurance is just ludicrous!
tumbleweed
I am as sick of Ralph Nader as I am the Republicans! He has f..... up every election since the beginning of 2000! And not proven a damned thing but he is capable of screwing up an election and some people with vote for anything!
nightdragon09
"...and some people with vote for anything!"
As an obvious Oh-Bummer voter, you just said a mouthful there tumbleweed!
rmrd0000
In a contest, I wonder if Sarah Palin or Ralph Nader would get the fewest African-American votes. There is little difference in tone from the Limbaughs and the Naders of the world.
Nader has paid as much attention to African-Americans as Sarah Palin.
nightdragon09
Not for nothing, but when 95% of African-Americans vote lock-in-step with the Democrats no matter who's running, why should anyone care if they continue to vote in the same corrupt politicians time and again that have led once prosperous and sprawling cities to ruin and devastated communities? Not to mention the fact that the politicians they keep voting for have left the majority of African Americans in a permanent welfare and entitlement state, with over 70% of children born to single mothers.
Nevertheless, ironically the African American vote won't be guaranteed for Obama the next time around, because African Americans historically have a low voter turn-out rate, and you can only vote for the "1st Black President" once!
linuxmill
You've GOT to be kidding. Nader tells the truth. Some don't like it, but at least he is an honest broker. Limbaugh/Palin are propagandists of the highest order.
Have a look at their respective writings and accomplishments:
Nader: seatbelts, OSHA, EPA. 4 times presidential candidate. (too many more contributions to the people of the US to name)
Limbaugh: limbaugh letter, a party in Colorado, personal wealth, cochlear implant to repair drug habit damage.
Palin: quit as Governor of Alaska with many ethics violations pending, VP candidate, personally wealthy from book capitlizing on free press of election and controversial, mostly incorrect, witicisms.
rmrd0000
Both nightdragon09 and linuxmill display the same stereotype that one finds in conservatives. Conservatives say that African-Americans don't vote for republicans because Blacks want welfare program. Blacks are not bright enough to see the wisdom offered by the GOP.
Two Nader supporters are stating that Blacks are impoverished because they do not see the wisdom of voting for someones as unelectable as Ralph Nader. Nader speaks the truth and is rejected by Blacks. rush tells the truth and is rejected by Blacks. Little difference in tone.
African-American poverty is impacted by differences in the types of home loans that are offered by banks, differences in the level of care given to Blacks as opposed to Whites for the sames diseases, the prices that can be negotiated for automobiles, etc. The differences persist even when income level and credit status are equal.
Studies have shown that Whites with prison records have equal or better access to employment than Blacks without criminal records. There re a host of issues that impact poverty in the Black community including differences in sentencing practices for the same crimes.
Blacks in NYC did not vote for Al Sharpton. Blacks won't vote for Dennis Kucinich. Both men simply would not win in a national election. The same is true for the ego-maniacal Ralph Nader.
President Nader would be rendered useless by both political parties because Nader would have no Congressional base of support. That is the reality of politics. Ralph Nader was too busy promoting himself than to work on building a grassroots organization.
nightdragon09
rmrd0000... I am not, nor will I ever be, a "Nader supporter"... and you are the one who started stereotyping and interjecting African Americans into the topic in your original post. African-Americans aren't ignored or rejected by the GOP... they just don't get the same coddling and hand-outs that the Dems like give to every minority group with some kind of issue or grievance, just to ensure that they keep their votes locked up every 2-4 years.
"Blacks in NYC did not vote for Al Sharpton." No, but they sure as hell come out in droves to support him whenever he's pimping his latest race-baiting protest or march for "insert alleged police brutality or discrimination victim here."
BTW, Rush Limbaugh's right hand man on his radio show is African-American, but you wouldn't know that since you get all your news exclusively from lefty blogs and websites, and therefore you just assume he is nothing but a racist bigot who would have kicked all African-American players off the team should he have become co-owner of the St. Louis Rams.
rmrd0000
nightragon, the GOP is currently coddling the John Birch society, birthers, etc. The GOP has to send a message of inclusion rather than hostility to the African-American community.
McCain/Palin turned a blind eye to the racism being projected at Republican rallies during the Primaries. The GOP Presidential ticket got 5% of the vote. 15% of the African-American self-identifies as Republican. Black Republicans either stayed home or vote for the Democratic ticket.
But, please tell the GOP to stick to it's current hostile message. The Democrats loves the GOP for that tone.
As for Limbaugh's sidelkick, so what? Tony Dungy supported Limbaugh and probably voted for McCain/Palin. While Dungy is respected for his religious beliefs and coaching skills, the majority of African-Americans disagree with Dungy on Limbaugh.
Regarding race, Limbaugh introduced race into the school bus incident and treid to tie Obama to the situation.
greenferret
Nader has always stood up for the people, that's why everyone in Washington is so afraid of him. I can think of no better way to start our country back on the right track than sending Nader to the senate. Sign the petition encouraging him to run:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Nader-for-senate-2010
WeThePeeps
I've got your back on this one and have signed the petition. Nader is the Man! He's done more for America as a private citizen than any hack President with the exception of Abraham Lincoln. Now if only everyone who cared to comment here had any ounce of critical thinking left in them, they'd see that the old scapegoat ruse isn't going to change the fact of ballot corruption, and all those who voted for Obama have just set themselves up for another Bush in the White House. It's time for real change you can count on with Ralph Nader. Not bait-and-switch style politics.
DakLak
I thought Nader was an expert on GM cars.
He show is out of touch on this one. Unsound at any speed.
donquijoterocket
Hell rigid ralph wasn't even an expert on the Corvair,which according to most of the engineers, and some cr enthusiasts, I know was not that bad an automobile especially compared to the typical Detroit offering of the time. Ralphy found a single issue he could exploit to satisfy his boundless ego and is still riding the momentum of that issue.If I ever found him contributing significantly to the public debate on anything other than expressing what Ralph thinks and feels ought to be the case then I might rethink.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.