portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

government selection 2004

Diagnosing Ralph Nader

I knew I would see intellectual bilge like this from the timid legions of the left once Ralph Nader announced an independent campaign for the presidency.
I found this blog posting by Andy Stern at the Service Employees International Union's site by way of a comment I saw posted on <a href=" http://www.bigleftoutside.com/comments/18/"target="blank">Al Giordiano's Big, Left, Outside blog site</a>. You always know somebody doesn't have an argument when they engage in psychiatric character assassination. It's a cheap way to argue and is in reality no argument at all. In his first post about the Nader presidential announcement on Sunday Giordiano mused that perhaps Nader has "lost his mind." Stern chimed in on his blog that Nader is a "malignant narcissist."

Stern writes that "Janitors, nursing home workers, and child care workers do not have millions in the bank when all else fails. They live the consequences of Ralph Nader's last failed effort. They need a new President, not another self-indulgent effort," as if Nader is responsible for what is going on in Washington these days, like the Bush administration's regressive taxation policies, not the timid Democratic Party which hasn't substantially resisted Bush. For example, take, say, opposition to the PATRIOT Act. It's not being led by wimpy Beltway Democrats, but by grassroots efforts to get local and state governments to pass anti-PATRIOT Act resolutions. John Ashcroft's Justice Department was so concerned about public opposition to the act that his department created a propaganda website to defend this repulsive legislation last year: <a href=" http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/"target="blank">Lifeandliberty.gov</a>. Who is going to point this out during the presidential campaign? John Kerry? Without anybody to his left who can get prominent media exposure, like Nader, barking at him? Give me a break.

History isn't a very popular subject in most political circles in this country. The timid legions of the left need constant reminding as to why there was a Nader campaign in 2000 in the first place. No, it wasn't because there is "no difference" between the Democratic and Republican parties and Gore and Bush. As repentant Nader voter Michael Moore pointed out during a talk he gave in the Seattle area last year, there were differences between Hilter and Mussolini. The two major parties do represent different constituencies and the Democratic Party has been stabbing the very constituencies they claim to represent in the back for the past generation, especially under the eight years of Clinton. Who stuffed NAFTA down the throats of organized labor in 1993? Clinton and the Democratic Party, or Ralph Nader? Who stuffed the Crime Bill down the throats of the African-American community in 1994? Clinton and the Democratic Party, or Ralph Nader? Who stuffed TANF (a.k.a. "Welfare Reform") down the throats of poor single mothers in 1996? Clinton and the Democratic Party, or Ralph Nader? Clinton ran in '96 on the promise that he would undo the bad things he did, like TANF. Well, not surprisingly, he didn't do it and all the timid legions of the left can do is scream at the only candidate in 2000 who was pointing out things like this.

I would suggest the timid left who constantly insist that we have to keep supporting the Democratic presidential nominee every four years, no matter how reactionary, look more like a battered wife who goes back to her abusive husband on the promise that he'll beat her with a shorter stick. -Rick

<b><center><a href=" http://www.fightforthefuture.org/blog/index.cfm?bge_id=40"target="blank">Ralph Nader Doesn't Get It</a></b></center>
<i>Ok, let me get down to it -- Ralph Nader doesn't get it.

Sure, he is smart, with a great record of fighting for change. But we are at war with George Bush, and we don't need our efforts divided by historical figures with huge -- EGOs.

The DSM (a medical reference book) has the appropriate psychological diagnosis for people like Ralph Nader: a <b>malignant narcissist</b>.

"An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts."

Janitors, nursing home workers, and child care workers do not have millions in the bank when all else fails. They live the consequences of Ralph Nader's last failed effort. They need a new President, not another self-indulgent effort.

My question: What do you think about that?

Posted by Andy Stern at 07:28 AM EST</i>

homepage: homepage: http://rickgiombetti.blogspot.com/2004_02_22_rickgiombetti_archive.html#107759605692110327

yawn 24.Feb.2004 18:04

blech

booooring.

Vote the truth, not your fears! 29.Mar.2004 13:11

Amy

Nader is not & has never been the cause of Bush's interception of the presidency. Is it Ralph's fault that Gore could not get anymore than 50% of the people to like him? He should've worked harder. And consider this- if Nader would have gotten the 5% he was looking for in 2000 we would have a watchdog party in the White House right now. If you've nver read Nader's book "Crashing the Party" then you have no idea how blackballed Nader was during his campaign by the media & the debates. What happened to Nader in 2000 was un-American & for progressive people like Dean to encourage US citizens NOT to vote for Nader for fear that Bush will win again goes against the very meaning of the democracy we are trying to restore.