You may have noticed an odd feeling this election cycle. It's kind of hard to put your finger on, but it's kind of like an absence of a beige-ish grayness. That's the sensation of not having Ralph Nader running for office for the first time since forever.
Though, he's still doing his best be a part of the debate. At least, to the degree to which he ever was…
On issues related to the military and foreign policy, Obama’s worse than Bush, "in the sense that he’s more aggressive, more illegal worldwide," Nader told Politico, going so far as to call Obama a "war criminal."…
"He's gone beyond George W. Bush in drones, for example. He thinks the world is his plate, that national sovereignties mean nothing, drones can go anywhere. They can kill anybody that he suspects and every Tuesday he makes the call on who lives and who dies, supposed suspects in places like Yemen and Pakistan and Afghanistan, and that is a war crime and he ought to be held to account."…
Tags: Barack Obama, Corporations, Military, Mitt Romney, Ralph Nader
An old bit of I'm-not-so-certain-how-true-it-actually-is electoral wisdom states that it is incredibly difficult to unseat an incumbent president unless he has to face a strong contender in his party's primaries. (Think of Teddy Kennedy back in 1980.) Just wanted to provide you with a little bit of optimism that you can roll around in your head while continuing work on the Rick Perry fallout chamber you're building in your backyard. (Still not sure how you're planning on stocking eight years worth of 1st Degree Burn Blazin' Jalapeno Doritos down there, but I assume you've got stuff all worked out.)
Oh, on a totally unrelated topic, Ralph Nader and Cornel West are looking to mount a half dozen campaigns against Obama next year…
The group said Saturday it is seeking six "recognizable, articulate" candidates who would not mount serious challenges to Obama, but "rigorously debate his policy stands" on issues related to labor, poverty, foreign policy, civil rights and consumer protections.
[Ralph] Nader said Saturday it is "very unlikely" he would challenge Obama, and that he is gauging the interest of former lawmakers and governors, academics, authors and labor leaders.
"I just want all these liberal, progressive agendas to be robustly debated. Otherwise, there will be a de facto blackout of their discussion" during next year’s campaign, Nader said.
Running as a third party candidate? Bah! That's so 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 and 2008. Primary running! That's the wave of the future. Get in early, fuck shit up asap, and then get out so that you can start making plans for the next election in four years.
I do, however, empathize with Nader here. I think I share a lot of people's disappointment and frustration with President Obama, so I can totally see why you'd want to force him to publicly address progressives' concerns and make campaign promises to not keep. I respect Nader, and I think a lot of good can come from his efforts.
For one thing, I'm looking forward to having less-complicated negative feelings about the president once again. I'm really looking forward to disliking President Perry.
Photo by Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images
Tags: Barack Obama, Cornel West, Democrats, Primaries, Ralph Nader
Ralph Nader responds to a New York Times editorial about how progressives have "ceded the field to the Tea Party and, in doing so, allowed it to make history"…
"[H]ave your public editor look into why flagrant, often bigoted right-wingers are given so much time and space compared with fact-based progressive leaders committed to the 'equality and welfare' that your editorial espouses."
I like him so much more when he's saying stuff like this then when he's running for president.
Tags: New York Times, Quote Unquote, Ralph Nader
On the eve of President Obama's inauguration — with angry voters in Massachusetts turning out to hand the GOP a 41-59 controlling interest in the Senate — is it too early to look forward three years and start speculating on his reelection chances?
Almost certainly. But let's do it anyway…
A year into his tenure, a majority of Americans would already vote against Pres. Obama if the '12 elections were held today, according to a new survey.
The Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor poll shows 50% say they would probably or definitely vote for someone else. Fully 37% say they would definitely cast a ballot against Obama. Meanwhile, just 39% would vote to re-elect the pres. to a 2nd term, and only 23% say they definitely would do so.
Wow! And only a year into his first term. It truly takes a special kind of politician to elicit that kind of reaction in voters. I wonder what did it? Was it the constant stream of acquiescence to conservatives? I'm sure that helped, but I'd put my money on the pissing all over everything his liberal base finds worthwhile.
All this must bode excellent well for the Republican Party's great white white white white presidential hope, right?
[A] new poll shows that [Sarah] Palin's situation is even worse than you might think. This survey, conducted by CBS News, shows that a sizeable majority of Americans — 71 percent — don't even want her to run. 21 percent of respondents, on the other hand, told CBS they do want her to.
Even a majority of Republicans said they don't want her to run. 56 percent of respondents told CBS that, compared with 30 percent who disagreed.
This truly will be a battle of personalities, huh? Looks like we'll finally be getting back to a good ol' American lesser of two evils election. Making difficult and unsavory decisions are what this nation was founded on. It's how our some of Founding Fathers ended up settling in Delaware over New Jersey.
You know, if you think about it, 2012 might actually be Ralph Nader's year. That is if he can eek out a win over None of the Above.
Tags: Barack Obama, Ralph Nader, Sarah Palin
Something exciting's happening these days. Can't you just smell it in the air? It smells sort of gasoline-y, with some sulfur-ish overtones. And definitely some unwashed stale perspiration.
Yeah, that right! According to the Missouri Information Analysis Center, it's militia-joining time!
"Due to the current economical and political situation, a lush environment for militia activity has been created," the Feb. 20 report reads. "Unemployment rates are high, as well as costs of living expenses. Additionally, President Elect Barrack [sic] Obama is seen as tight on gun control and many extremists fear that he will enact firearms confiscations."
MIAC is one of 58 so-called "fusion centers" nationwide that were created by the Department of Homeland Security, in part, to collect local intelligence that authorities can use to combat terrorism and related criminal activities.
You don't have to pitch to me anymore of your silly fearful plan to spy on U.S. citizens. 'Cause I'm sold! I'm joinin' up one of them there militias you speak of.
Let's see… I've already got the unkempt beard and festering misanthropy. What are some of the other requirements?
People who supported former third-party presidential candidates like Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr are cited in the report, in addition to anti-abortion activists and conspiracy theorists who believe the United States, Mexico and Canada will someday form a North American Union.
"Militia members most commonly associate with 3rd party political groups," the report reads. "It is not uncommon for militia members to display Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty or Libertarian material."
Oh, bummer. I was hoping to join a group of disaffected guerrilla soldiers living in the woods, arming myself against imaginary threats and gleefully defecating into freshly-dug holes in the ground.
I didn't know I'd have to hang out with crazy people.
Tags: Bob Barr, Constitution Party, Green Party, Homeland Security, Libertarian, Missouri, Ralph Nader, Ron Paul