Why not Ralph Nader's idea to solve the financial meltdown?

[brentspeak]

Nader's idea, according to Chris Hedges:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Resist-or-Become-Serfs-by-Chris-Hedges-090406-703.html

The Obama administration, rather than chart a new course, is intent on re-inflating the bubble. The trillions of dollars of government funds being spent to sustain these corrupt corporations could have renovated our economy. We could have saved tens of millions of Americans from poverty. The government could have, as consumer activist Ralph Nader has pointed out, started 10 new banks with $35 billion each and a 10-to-1 leverage to open credit markets. Vast, unimaginable sums are being placed into these dirty corporate hands without oversight. And they will use this money as they always have--to enrich themselves at our expense.

[patrice]

1. Isn't it all going to go down anyway? We're giving them a chance to pull at least some of THEIR

fat out of the fire and they're going to abandon us anyway.

[dionysus]

2. Saint Ralph, Will Swoop Down In His Holy Corvair And Save Us All!!

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Better Believe It]

3. So who would you trust more as Treasury Sec? Wall Streets representative or Ralph Nader

I'd pick Nader in a heartbeat.

[dionysus]

4. I'd rather not have that bag of douche in charge of anything. ralph is all about ralph and his ego.

he's a fraud.

[salguine]

13. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I've known Ralph

personally for many years, and the man has the least ego of anyone I've ever met.

You probably have no idea just how much you, as an American, have to thank him for—the list of legislation that has benefited the public that he has directly spurred is endless, as is the list of organizations that he's started for the public—that it, your—benefit. He's dedicated his life to the service of American consumer, at considerable expense to himself—you will never know how much he has personally sacrificed for his work.

And before you go pulling out that tired old "He gave us George W. Bush" nonsense, don't even bother. I ain't buying it. He didn't "steal" anything—people who voted for him gave him their votes of their own accord. That's how a democracy works.

[dionysus]

14. fuck nader. ralph sold out to his ego long ago. pimping the lie that both parties are the same did

contribute in part to Gore's loss. anyone who voted for ralph nader is a damned fool.

and ralph is an egotistical prick.

[kenfrequed]

18. I love how you engage the issues here

I mean even a stopped watch is right twice a day. If disagree because you think Ralph is a jerk thats fine. If you disagree because you hate his solutions just say so. But if you want to sound like a rational adult I would suggest that you stick to the later of the two and avoid the former.

This hate on Ralph for standing on his principles is getting pathetic. Bush stole the election and we didn't stand up enough. Gore's advisors pushed him to the right and basically handed Nader environmental and economic issue voters as well as the youth vote. That really was a mistake and it was Gore's mistake.

[dionysus]

20. ralph knows that he only exists to sap democratic votes. if you've bought into his shtick, i feel

sorry for you.

He took a big crap over the good he did decades ago. He's become a sad joke.

[Romulox]

23. A vote isn't "Democratic" until it is cast for a Democrat.

The voters don't answer to the Party. Other way around. :hi:

[dionysus]

31. i do like how ralph takes money from right wingers to underminethe dems...

isn't that awesome? :hi:

[Romulox]

35. Some Dems need to be undermined (Evan Bayh, e.g.) nt

[dionysus]

36. i'm with you on that point. the 15 "conservadems" need to go.

[Better Believe It]

40. What about all of the Republican money given to Obama and John Kerry?

Ralph Nader didn't get 1% of the Republican campaign donations given to Obama and before him John Kerry. Republicans gave millions to Obama's election campaign. No problem with that .... right?

And Wall Street gave big bucks to McCain and Obama and nothing to Ralph Nader.

Why do you think that is?

Do we need to draw a map for you?

[dionysus]

64. the difference would be, purposely obtuse one;

republicans who gave money to barack actually wanted him to win

republicans who gave money to ralph nader wanted him to sap votes from kerry.

there's your map.

[karynnj]

112. The difference is that the vast majority of Obama's and Kerry's contributions came from DEMOCRATS

The Republicans who gave them money - especially in the general election - did it because they wanted them to win. The Republicans who gave Nader money wanted him to pull votes from Gore, Kerry and Obama. That is a good map as to why for me.

Many old style Republicans preferred Obama and Kerry to Bush and McCain. (In my area there were a few Republicans that had always hoped John Keinz from neighboring PA would win - there were some who supported Kerry because they were impressed with Teresa's values.

[avaistheone1]

45. Hhmm. I thought a lot of right wingers contributed to Obama's campaign.

Only then it was something to be proud about?


:shrug:

[dionysus]

50. oh yes, obama was totally funded by the RWers....

:spray:

[avaistheone1]

52. You are the one who used the word "totally".

for drama purposes I suppose.

Nonetheless, your response is not credible.

:think:

[dionysus]

55. i don't consider anyone who supports nader to be credible...

:shrug:

[reggie the dog]

78. ha

aint you all high and mighty

[dionysus]

92. no more so than any ralph nader advocate...

:shrug:

[avaistheone1]

129. Well at least Ralph Nader stands for something more than himself.

What do you stand for? :kick:

[reggie the dog]

131. what about Nader

advocates who think voting for Gore was credible too?

[mkultra]

106. maybe your to stupid to understand dilution.

[Bonobo]

132. "Your to stupid"! Ha ha ha! The irony is too delicious!!! LOL!

"Get a brain, Morans!"


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Romulox]

135. LOLOL!

:rofl:

[kenfrequed]

39. Oh really?

So the Democrats DIDN'T move to the right on economic issues? There ISN'T an organization called the DLC dedicated to pushing the party to the right? The Blue Dogs are mythical animals that don't have any political power?

I know you are upset but democrats had gotten really bad at convincing people to vote for them because they refused to differentiate themselves from the repukes other than fetuses and firearms. How many times did I hear the phrase from some of these centrist tools "I'm liberal to moderate on social issues and fiscally conservative." And that was the formula for electability? Absolute madness.

It took eight years of the most assinine administration in American history to wake up the politicos to the fact that talking like a republican would not win you a damn thing. Even the DLC is trying to claim the word progressive these days and that ought to tell you something.

I don't blame you. I would hope that since you post here you are at least measuredly progressive. But the best way to avoid another Nader is maybe to give the economic progressives some ability to affect the outcome or decision at the least people really ought to be listening to Krugman at this time.

[salguine]

43. Here's a news flash for you, chick pea...There are no "Democratic" votes. There are no

"Republican" votes. Nobody is entitled to ANY votes at all. To say that Nader "stole" votes from Gore assumed that those votes somehow "belonged" to Gore before they were cast. That you can take such a position with a straight face belies a contortion of logic on par with anything we could see on Fox News.

My allegiance to the principles of Democracy outweighs my allegiance to any Party, no matter which Party it is. Sorry.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[salguine]

53. Not everyone who voted for Nader is/was an idiot. I know that's

comforting for you to believe, because it's easier to assume that than it is to contemplate the fact that many people voted for Nader because he addressed their concerns when Gore did not.

[dionysus]

56. if you say so...

:rofl:

[salguine]

58. What's funny? Do you have a sensible and reasoned counter-argument, or are you

one of those idiot geniuses who, when they can't hold their own in a debate, cuts off all discussion by proclaiming "You fail"?

What's funny? Come on, tell me. I wanna know.

[dionysus]

59. naderites are funny. their holier-than-thou shtick is awesome. did you vote for him?

[salguine]

62. How so? Examples? (see previous post)

[dionysus]

63. you're providing the evidence...

[salguine]

67. Again, you offer nothing. The Emperor is naked, folks! This has become

a tiresome waste of my time. I'll bow out now, and you can go ahead and claim your non-victory if it makes you feel good. Strut around like Bush on the carrier deck.

[dionysus]

68. have a nice day, nader voter...

:hi:

[salguine]

69. Did I vote for Nader? I don't recall that.

[dionysus]

70. you give a pretty good impression that you did...

:shrug:

[salguine]

71. Where? I never once said any such thing. YOU just decided I had voted for Nader.

[dionysus]

73. must have been your rabid defense of the guy...

:shrug:

[reggie the dog]

82. you have no respect for the democratic process

people vote their conscience. I vote extreme left. I voted Green for governor in Illinois. Look what the Democrat did! I voted Bové for president in France in the first round and Socialist in the second. Perhaps the USA should change and do run off elections. Why should I have voted Democrat in 2000? I was 21. The Democrats did fuck all for me or for blue collar workers that made up my family while Clinton was president. Hell Clintonand Gore gave us free trade with Mexico. At least Nader voters vote on the left, even farther to the left than the Democrats. And another thing the "left" in the USA is farther to the right than the right wing here in France. Nader would pass for a centrist candidate here in France.

[dionysus]

89. gimme instant runoff voting and i'm all for more parties. until then, not so much...

:hi:

[reggie the dog]

80. well no shit

why else would people vote for him? You are a bit smug. Do you toe the Democratic party line on all issues?

[reggie the dog]

79. well

fuck you too then if that what it comes down to. Suckered into voting for the guy who wrote unsafe at any speed? He directly fights coprorations to protect people and idiots voted for him?

[dionysus]

90. i would say anyone who bought the Gore = Bush lie is an idiot of the worst sort, yes

:hi:

[salguine]

101. .

[dionysus]

103. i bet you typed something nasty, in defense of nader, and didn't have the stones to let it stand...

:rofl:

[salguine]

130. Nah, I moved it further down 'cause I accidentally posted it after the wrong comment. The

moderators removed it.

[reggie the dog]

76. seatbelts?

saftey standards for cars?

he exists to protect the people from capitalist who only want to make the most money as fast as they can and if the democrats do a shitty job protectic us from them than what is wrong with Ralph doing his thing?

PS GORE WON bush stole the damned selection ......

[jeffrey_X]

145. It must suck to be so misinformed and uneducated.

"ralph knows that he only exists to sap democratic votes."

LOFL

Get a clue.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

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

[dionysus]

102. cool, can you please loudly state your affinity for nader and dislike for obama loud and clear for

Skinner? you got the stones to do that? i don't think so... you should post a thread about it.

christ you guys are funny.

[TahitiNut]

51. It's useless to get in the way of DU's Two-Minute-Hate ... mindless Nader-bashing is sport, here.

:shrug: DU reverts to some pre-sapient lizard mentality at the mere mention of 'Nader.'

[Lilith Velkor]

74. He was always the Clenis of DU

Except for those few months when the Clintoris was the Clenis of DU.

[Better Believe It]

84. That's a whole lot easier than attacking the Wall Street crooks that Obama has hired

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

91. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PBS Poll-435]

5. I would rather have the Hamburgler than Ralph

[SIMPLYB1980]

6. LoL!

[mkultra]

107. i woudl rather have boss hog than nader

[DevonRex]

8. Ralph is the asshole responsible for 8 years of W. He's an arrogant

jerk who shouldn't be in charge of anything.

[Thrill]

15. Nader doesn't know a damn thing about this crisis or how to solve it

.

[kenfrequed]

19. uhm

Nader actually predicted this sort of economic crisis and has also predicted (albeit obviously) that this bail out is just going to be another corporate wealth-fare boondoggle.

I really wish you would actually read some of what he has said about this.

[Luminous Animal]

93. And you know this how?

Compare his statement to Greenspan's at the Gramm-Leahy "Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (that nasty piece of legislation that helped get us into this mess) and get back to me when you figure out who knew what they were talking about.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/bank/hba54744.000/hba54744_1.HTM

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

137. I'd pick Wall Street reps in a heartbeat.

Neither care about anything but themselves - I'll at least take the guy with some knowledge of what's going on.

[DevonRex]

7. Ralph hasn't had a good idea in decades. So ROFL at this.

[dionysus]

9. this thread might be more of an EPIC FAIL than the one bitching about Michelle...

:rofl:

:hi:

[DevonRex]

11. I think I'll hang around to see how this turns out...

:rofl:

:popcorn: Want some? I made it with Smart Balance butter so it's even good for you. :hi:

[dionysus]

12. don't forget the mortons hot salt!

:popcorn:

[DevonRex]

16. OMG. I never heard of that before. I'm going to the store.

Really, thanks. How on earth could I have missed it? I love spicy. :)

[rhett o rick]

10. Akkkkkkkkk you said the N word. nm

[ProSense]

17. Incredible!

The Obama administration, rather than chart a new course, is intent on re-inflating the bubble. The trillions of dollars of government funds being spent to sustain these corrupt corporations could have renovated our economy. We could have saved tens of millions of Americans from poverty. The government could have, as consumer activist Ralph Nader has pointed out, started 10 new banks with $35 billion each and a 10-to-1 leverage to open credit markets. Vast, unimaginable sums are being placed into these dirty corporate hands without oversight. And they will use this money as they always have--to enrich themselves at our expense.

"You are going to see the biggest waste, fraud and abuse in American history,"- Nader warned when I asked about the bailouts. "Not only is it wrongly directed, not only does it deal with the perpetrators instead of the people who were victimized, but they don't have a delivery system of any honesty and efficiency. The Justice Department is overwhelmed. It doesn't have a tenth of the prosecutors, the investigators, the auditors, the attorneys needed to deal with the previous corporate crime wave before the bailout started last September. It is especially unable to deal with the rapacious ravaging of this new money by these corporate recipients. You can see it already. The corporations haven't lent it. They have used some of it for acquisitions or to preserve their bonuses or their dividends. As long as they know they are not going to jail, and they don't see many newspaper reports about their colleagues going to jail, they don't care. It is total impunity. If they quit, they quit with a golden parachute. Even Wagoner is taking away $21 million."-

Then what?

Not a single mention of regulatory reform in that piece. After starting 10 banks, the writer jumps to the "Justice Department is overwhelmed."

The entire piece is a rant focused heavily on abuses. It offers no solutions using real data or describing how simply starting 10 banks would solve the problem.

[kenfrequed]

28. Well

Regulatory reform is obviously a part of ANY program to fix our economic situation. Ralph is being quoted by another source here specifically about what to do with the money. You do note that this article has quotation marks in it?

[Romulox]

21. Nobody hates Ralph as much as the "centrists" (see upthread).

They especially hate it when he's right. :rofl:

[Occam Bandage]

24. I would hate it when he's right, except that hasn't happened in about twenty years.

Unless you still believe that Gore would have been just as bad as Bush.

[dionysus]

26. are you calling me a centrist? LOLOLOLOL them's fightin words...

but i always kinda figured you out for a nader man....

[Romulox]

30. I have no clue who you are. nt

[Better Believe It]

44. I disagree. Wall Street crooks and their political whores in both parties hate him more.

[mkultra]

109. nader is a great anti-coorporate spokesman but he doesnt no shit about ecomonomics

hes a good attorney and a good man but he needs to learn that we don't have run off elections here in America and that if your not one of the big two your not going to win. that would certainly help us avoid crazy ass republicans like George bush in 2000. That was nader's fault.

[Romulox]

134. A child could tell you that neoliberal economics are garbage.

They say even animals have an innate sense of "fairness".

[mkultra]

140. if your arguing against free markets

you have an endless task ahead of you as no social economic systems has ever worked. Despite that fact, there is no way America is going to kick capitalism. Our only path is properly regulated free markets.

[Romulox]

141. What "free market"? The one propped up with trillions of taxpayer $$$, you mean?

"no social economic systems has ever worked."

Really? Europeans (and wealthy Americans) seem to enjoy their "social economic systems" (sic) quite a lot! :hi:

[mkultra]

143. the european systems are actually very similair to our own

They are regarded as social democracies because they all retain a wage-based economy and private ownership. They really aren't socialist economies in the sense that there is still private ownership which is the demarcation point for socialism.

We could still stand to swing more that way, such as in nationalizing utilities but other than that, full social economies, aside from china, have all failed.

[Romulox]

144. Major difference: they don't claim to be "free markets" while funneling trillions to bankers.

[mkultra]

146. but even in sweden

which has a socialized economy, the bank stabilization was a necessary evil. The current plan being followed mimics the Swedish method and its the right thing to do. I don't really care so much about the debt, taxing people over 250K a year will help fix that problem.

[Romulox]

147. Are you simple? It is moronic to tout the supremacy of the "free market" under the facts that exist

today. :hi:

[mkultra]

150. a regulated free market is always better than a socialist economy.

in every case.

[Occam Bandage]

22. We know damn well that even if Obama were to do everything that useless sack o' egotism asked,

he'd turn around in a week and start complaining that everything Obama did was done for the benefit of the Evil Corporatists. Ralph's a one-trick pony.

[Romulox]

25. So might as well just give trillions in taxpayer $$$ to private equity!

Yeah! That'll show him! :silly:

[Occam Bandage]

27. Ralph has, over and again, proven he has spectacularly bad judgment,

especially when it comes to the Democratic party. He's nothing now but a tool of the right, taking conservative money and deluded into thinking he's helping liberalism.

[Romulox]

33. I notice that your responses to this thread don't address the substance of the matter.

Not interested in Ad Homs against Nader at this point.

[Occam Bandage]

37. Sure, it's technically possible

that Ralph accidentally stumbled into a good plan during the course of his regular anti-Democratic ramble, in much the same way that it is possible that Rush Limbaugh might accidentally stumble into a good plan or two under similar circumstances. And just like with Rush, I'll refuse to give either man's bloated ego the honor of considering their plan so long as it comes from them. If the plan is valid, I will soon hear it from non-laughable sources, and I will then give it full consideration.

[Romulox]

38. More Ad Hominems. Can you wake me when you're through? Zzzzzz. nt

[dionysus]

29. who actually has defense company stocks in his portfolio. he's a fraud

he and la rouche should form a club...

[AtomicKitten]

32. Ralph.

[dionysus]

34. i have to hand it to ya, you did manage to bring some greens out of the woodwork!

:rofl:

[Better Believe It]

41. The apologists for Wall Street crooks hate Ralph Nader and other progressives

Republicans and Wall Street interests gave millions to Obama and McCain in 2008 and nothing to Ralph Nader.

One doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why.

[MadBadger]

42. -1

[dionysus]

48. uh, because ralph couldn't get elected as a dogcatcher? you guys are priceless...

:shrug:

[DevonRex]

46. Naderites are freakin' hilarious. Nader himself is just irrelevant now.

Completely irrelevant.

[dionysus]

47. they sure are worked into a lather today! Saint Ralph 4 3ver!!!

:rofl:

[Better Believe It]

85. Not anymore irrelevant than John Kerry. Remember him?

[dionysus]

96. you mean the powerful senator and chairman of congressional committees?

:rofl:

[Better Believe It]

99. Does he have enough power to get EFCA passed?

[dionysus]

105. does ralph? a swing and a miss..... a poor strawman at that as well...

[karynnj]

114. It is not clear Obama does -so that is a pretty poor test

It is also not something that his committee, SFRC, has jurisdiction over. He does though have a LOT more ability to influence Senators on teh fence than Nader does.

[Better Believe It]

136. You're right. Wall Street crooks have a lot more influence over Congress than Ralph Nader

That's too bad.

And John Kerry sure knows how to go after Somalia’s fishermen pirates. What has Nader ever done about pirates?

Argggg!

:) :)

[karynnj]

138. Did you think very hard before writing?

I did NOT say that WS crooks have more influence over Congress than Nader does - I might agree with that - but nothing I said says that. I said KERRY has more influence over Congress than Nader does.

Kerry is Chair of the SFRC and the Somali pirates are one of many foreign policy problems. In fact Kerry spoke of the difficulties of dealing with them back in December - before they were the topic of the day. This is an international issue and it can't be ignored. The fact is that Kerry knows far more on both foreign policy and on controlling waterways than Ralph Nader does.

[karynnj]

113. Kerry is a very senior Senator and Chair of the SFRC

Not to mention, he is an elder statesman for the party with Gore and Clinton. He unlike Nader, has always been a loyal Democrat -and is far more likely to have the President's ear than Nader.

[Sebastian Doyle]

54. The DLC'ers love to blame Ralph Nader for Chimpy's selection

Because it keeps the real reasons off the table:

1) Massive election fraud (DLC'ers continue to deny it exists)

2) The DLC hijacking of the Democratic party, which contributed greatly to the weak campaigns of both Gore and Kerry.

[dionysus]

57. not just DLCers. he pimped the utter lie that Gore would be the same as Bush.

did it singehandedly tip the election? no, but it helped.

[Sebastian Doyle]

60. The number of votes Nader got in Florida was a drop in the bucket

compared to the number that Jeb & Cruella Harris stole even before the election through their Choice Point ethnic cleansing of the voter rolls. Let alone all the fraud on election day, and in the 6 weeks that followed, up until the Supreme Court selection.

[dionysus]

61. how does your post address ralph's lies about Gore equalling Bush?

btw i agree there was massive voting fraud as well.

[Sebastian Doyle]

65. The DLC platform Gore was running on wasn't much different than the platform Chimpy was running on.

Does that reflect the reality of what Chimpy did in office, or what Gore likely would have done in office? Probably not. But Chimpy pretended to be a "centrist" in his campaign, as did Gore, at the urging of the DLC.

The veep candidates, even worse.... remember that debate where Darth Cheney and Lieberdouche agreed on damn near everything. Of course, in that case it wasn't even acting.

A Gore presidency would have been much better. More than likely no 9-11-01. Definitely no Iraq invasion & occupation. The environment would certainly be in better shape. Probably the economy as well. But as far as the platform the DLC forced on him, it really wasn't much different than what Chimpy was claiming (though he was lying about being a "moderate"). So Nader had a point, in that respect. Gore should have rejected the DLC's platform and their VP choice.

[dionysus]

66. he may have appeared to have a point as far as the campaign platforms, but the next 8 years

proved that in reality, his premise was totally false.

[PBS Poll-435]

72. Gore wanted Florida, hence Lieberman.

:shrug:

[Sebastian Doyle]

75. And look how well that worked

Besides, it didn't matter. Because of the Theresa La Republican Whore "butterfly ballot" all the elderly Jews accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan anyway. (which was so ironic that even Pat openly admitted they didn't intend to vote for him)

[Better Believe It]

100. Are you sure he didn't compare Joseph Leiberman to George Bush?

Now that's a choice!

[dionysus]

104. admirable strawman, but not a good one....

:shrug:

[Luminous Animal]

87. Nader bashers need to call out the rats in their own party.

13% of registered Democrats voted for Bush in Florida. 16% of Florida voters who voted for Clinton, voted for Bush.

http://politizine.blogspot.com/2004/02/debunking-myth-ralph-nader-didnt-cost.html

Exit polls reveal that 10 million Democrats voted for Bush in 2000... 300,000 of them in Florida alone. That would be 3 times the number of those who voted for Nader.

[change_notfinetuning]

110. Gore couldn't even win his home state of Tennessee. If he had, he'd have

been president, not Bush. Florida would have been irrelevant. What presidential candidate can't win his own state?

[depakid]

77. Nader theads are useful- let's us see who the truly clueless are

[ProSense]

108. Yeah, let's see who is truly

clueless

Ralph Nader is fucking idiot.

[dionysus]

111. ding ding ding folks... we have ah winnah!!

:thumbsup:

[depakid]

115. If Democrats had followed Nader's advice- rather than enabling and voting for Republican policies

through the 1990's and 00's, we wouldn't be having this conversation- which is something that the cludeless Nader haters can't seem to get through their heads.

[ProSense]

117. If Nader had stayed his sorry ass off the ballot in Florida 2000

Gore would have definitely gotten 1,000 more votes (not saying all the tens of thousands, but one friggin thousand) needed to win the election.

Save the lives of 4,000 Americans and possibly hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Don't give me that shit about following his advice like it's the wisdom of a sage. He's a fucking idiot. A lot of people on the internets have the same tired rants. I don't want them running for President just because they do. Anyone who equates Gore to Bush needs to be sent to Iraq for shoe therapy.

Nader is an egotistical dick.

Fuck him!





edited word

[depakid]

119. The bottom line that Democrats NEVER acknowledge- and the lesson that they never learn

is that if they hadn't pandered to the far right throughout the 1990's(and behaved pathetically during Bush's 1st term) Nader would never have had a constuency in the first place.

But nope- Democrats couldn't be bothered with standing up for their traditional values (or protecting their conctitients rather than their contributors) and so created a political vacuum, that Nader happened to fill.

Blind (and shallow) partisans fail to make the connection- that was THEIR support for right wing policies that allowed the election to be stolen. Instead of doing an honest assessment of what went wroing with their party, they act like cry babies and blame Nader.

In way, it's kind of funny- which is why I noted that these threads tend to expose the clueless.

[ProSense]

120. The bottom line is Nader is an idiot. What the hell has he learned?

He continues to make some of the most idiotic statement ever.

You want to follow his silliness go ahead, but stop whining because people see him for the ass he is.

[depakid]

121. Stomp feet all you like- the guy's been proven right on just about every major issue

Whereas Democrats became the stand for nothing sell out party- and on a good many issues- still are.

For instance, Nader predicted Democrats would roll over on the most extreme judicial nominees and on the most egregious legislation, and guess what? They did!

So I reckon I'll go with guys like Nader who got it right- as opposed to smarmy center right politicians who repeatedly sold us all down the river.

[ProSense]

122. "Whereas Democrats became the stand for nothing sell out party"

Nader is a loser. He's never right, just bitter. His position is simply anti-Democrats. You're free to continue supporting him.

[depakid]

123. No, his policies have been been right on the money

Not his fault that so many Democrats (and especially the leadership) abandoned their traditional values during the Clinton era. I'd have supported most anyone that spade a spade.

[ProSense]

125. " Not his fault that so many Democrats... " Not Dems fault he's a loser

Why did Nader sue the Democratic Party? He's a whiny egotistical jerk.

He can't muster support. He's inconsistent. He's bitter. He's clueless.

[slipslidingaway]

81. Expand the number of financial institutions instead of consolidating

the too big to fail into larger institutions.

[Phx_Dem]

86. Ralph Nader hasn't had a good idea for at least a decade. n/t

[Luminous Animal]

88. Indeed.

He predict this economic mess 8 years ago and fought for tighter regulation since the Clinton administration.


He was soooo totally wrong.

[zulchzulu]

94. So, who is employed at the banks? Nipple and nose-pierced Café baristas with Ché hemp t-shirts?

Oh... and does Ralph still have all those Wall Street stocks in his portfolio?

That said, some of my friends are nipple and nose-pierced Café baristas with Ché hemp t-shirts. Would they work in a bank? Are you f&*king kidding...

[dionysus]

95. rofl

n/t

[Political Heretic]

116. I've been looking through the response for one honest engagement of the IDEAS

and found none. Maybe I skimmed too fast or was blinded by all the ranting and raving. It all appears to be arguing about the person.

Kind of sad, the idea is sort of interesting, but I don't really know.

I've never been able to work up a huge pile of emotion either way about Nader, don't know why.

[invictus]

118. K&R. He is absolutetly right. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

124. Ralph was once a giant among men for the good he did the country

However, of late he has been more harm than help. His efforts, no matter how well intended are counterproductive.

Voting "your conscience" is also pretty much bullshit in my eyes. Sorry, but only a fool fails to have enough sense to take the lesser of two evils no matter how many times you must make that bitter choice. If you refuse to take the responsibility seriously then you have no business voting. If it doesn't matter to you then get out of the way of the people who have a preference. I'd also think that if the last 30 years hasn't shown you a contrast (no matter how much greater one wishes it was) then you're deaf, dumb, and blind. Voting "hard left" is pissing on your own shoes, it empowers the right.
That's the only functional result. It is sad, it sucks, it is somewhat counter-intuitive, but it is true.

[Raineyb]

126. Unfortunately, that attitude is why the Democratic party constantly

wusses out and has been swinging to the right. They figure that we don't have anywhere else to turn. We need more viable parties.

Instead of learning the lessons of 2000 instead Democrats have turned on Ralph Nader and have decided not to listen to him at all. The lesson should have been to stand up for Democratic principles. Apparently no lessons have been learned at all.

Regards

[TheKentuckian]

127. They swung to the right because Reagan's bullshit was bought

by the majority of the American people hook, line, and sinker which lead to lots of bloodbaths for Democrats. Only after demonstrative utter failure of Republican ideas have barely enough people seen fit to look for another direction.

We ran conservatives because that was what sold and because doing much else gos you a loss in most of the country.
I don't know why people can't accept that we got beat when they killed RFK and are only now awakening from the knockout. The American choose what we have. Hell, they didn't even really lie about the agenda, they just sold it and the people ate it up.

[depakid]

133. The data shows otherwise

Unfortunately, Democrats were more interested in the campaign money than in upholding their traditional Democratic values- and THAT brought us 8 years of Bush and 12 years of a Republican Congess.

See for yourself:

The Progressive Majority:
Why a Conservative America Is a Myth

http://mediamatters.org/progmaj/

Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007
Political Landscape More Favorable To Democrats

http://people-press.org/report/?reportid=312

[ProSense]

139. Did you vote for Nader?

If not, why not?

[digidigido]

128. Dead on kentuckian... Politics is the art of the possible, Nader forgot that and

anyone who says Nader doesn't have an ego is by definition an Idiot. You don't run for POTUS if you don't have an ego.

[HamdenRice]

142. Putting aside the Nader hate, there is a very good reason

The existing banks have a vast number of transactions already in progress -- people have their money in them, there are bondholders in them, lenders they already owe money, borrowers from them and so on.

The risk that these people will lose everything is called "counter-party risk" -- it's the risk that someone who is a "party" to an existing agreement with them will lose all their money if the bank fails.

Opening new banks will do nothing to prevent counter party risk. If the banks fail, the government still has to pay off depositors and counter parties, so the money is going to be paid for the old banks one way or another.

Letting them fail would cause another credit crisis and crash the economy.

Keeping them going is cheaper than letting them fail. New banks do nothing to prevent them from failing.

[kenfrequed]

148. Of course...

It is likely they will fail anyways. The difference is that with the money pumped into the system the big shareholders will get yet another chance to slither out before the derivative market falls causing complete failure.

New banks would not be invested in derivatives nor engaged in credit swap deals that will continue to play havoc.

Really the best way they could improve the market is to drop more of the money into the bottom and let it work its way up the economy. Bank Bailouts are not going to work due to corruption and their desire to sop up all the monies.

[Dawgs]

149. This is the same Nader that likes Summers?

:shrug: