Ralph Nader: any redeeming features at all?

NOT content with being the clown who played an instrumental part in giving the Republicans their “victory” in the 2000 presidential election, the oxygen thief that is Ralph Nader has hit an all-time low, even for him.

The following is fairly self-explanatory and confirms Nader as much, much worse than the sanctimonious buffoon we all know him to be.




Filed under Politics, Uncategorized, United States

6 responses to “Ralph Nader: any redeeming features at all?

  1. Yep Nader’s an utter, er, prat of a man. But ultimately the bloke who gave Bush the victory in 2000 was probably Joe Lieberman. The same Democrat-turned-‘Independent-Democrat’ who was at McCain’s side throughout this last election and the man who, if there’s any justice, will soon have his Senate Chairmanship seat removed from him, so he can cross the floor to be with his Republican friends.

    Gore/Lieberman 2000? Gore’s defeat not only elevated Gore above Party politics, but also saved the World from a future President Lieberman, and for that we have nobody than Lieberman himself to thank.

    Nader is at least being true to himself. Lieberman is just a snake. Good riddance.

  2. Why anyone bothers talking to him is acomplete mystery

  3. Andrew F

    I love how everyone blames Nader for 2000 and not the 2.9 million people who voted for him? Was it particularly responsible of Nader to campaign in Florida? With hindsight, no. But it’s not really his job to worry about such things.

    It was Clinton and Gore that created a 3 million-voter niche by not guarding their left flank . It’s thanks to Nader that we got a real liberal in 2008. The Democrats realised that there were more votes to be won by turning out a dormant base of African Americans and lefties than by squeezing the undecideds.

    But yes, that was rather offensive of Nader.

  4. Chris' Wills

    What do you think it confirms Nader as?

    Shouldn’t Obama be an Uncle Sam?

    Oh, perhaps it is the term Uncle Tom you object to?

    This is, as you should know, a term applied to people who sell out or are deemed by others to have sold out; most often applied to african-Americans (by other african-Americans) who are deemed to act white (whatever that means) in the US or to not act like african-Americans should. Similar to the terms coconut and oreo used as perjoratives.

    I suspect Nader is using it with its general sell out meaning and did so to contrast the two well known Uncles in US culture, one generally seen as good and the other gnerally seen as bad.

    Is it racist? Not necessarily.

    Is calling Mrs Clinton a corporate whore sexist?

    A whore sells to the highest bidder and provides a service. Mrs Clinton sold herself to WalMart, an anti-union corporation and provided a service (fig leaf for their corporate abuses of labour worldwide), so is a whore in that sense.

    Should Nader have hoped that Obama wouldn’t be a corporate whore? Perhaps, but the literary allusion and contrast between the modern US iconography of the two uncles would have been lost.

  5. Chris' Wills

    To answer the general question.

    Nader has and had few if any redeeming features, he would fit in very well in NuLiebor.

  6. Jim

    How did you even find this? No one pays attention to Nader over here even though he asks the occasional good (if poorly phrased) question.

    Anyway, closer to your house, Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi complimented Obama on his “even tan”. You can get the full story here. Nader is mild compared to this, and remember: Nader holds no office over here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s