nov 5
2008
9 comments
I feel sad for him, even more sad that somehow I agree with Fox News.
"Really." "Ralph Nader, what was that?"
posted by Culture Bully at 5:56 PM on November 5, 2008 
Ugh...
*ralph*
are we done with this now?
posted by ana at 6:08 PM on November 5, 2008
On a positive note, we now have an adequate stand-in for Peter Boyle if there's ever an "Everybody Loves Raymond" reunion. (Too soon?)
posted by Robert at 8:29 PM on November 5, 2008
Wow. WTF was that? Didn't see this until now. There are 2 types of people. Wiggers and Giggers. I think this classifies as Wiggin'.
posted by Curtis at 8:58 PM on November 5, 2008
I saw Ralph speak in 2004 in Mandan, ND. He had a great schtick, but it was all about consumer protection and how corporations were evil, etc. Just too bad he didn't quit after helping GW steal the presidency. I can't believe he really meant that to come out in that way, but he hasn't really done anything productive since working with the Green party. Some good ideas but why not use the system to implement them rather than rail against it? Change from within, old man....
posted by Sandman at 9:23 PM on November 5, 2008
I think he knew exactly what he was doing. I think he was trying to get airtime for his message at any cost. The fact that he got on Fox News, went all over the blogs, and that we're having this conversation is the indication of a successful media tactic. If he had used the word "shill" instead, which would have worked just as well in the context of his argument (whether any of us agree with his argument or not), we wouldn't be talking about it right now. This is a smart guy - he knew exactly the costs and rewards of using that term, particularly in this context, and intentionally went ahead with it. I don't think it was the out-of-touch gaffe of a loony old man who is losing it. He can't get media coverage anymore without using stunts, and this one worked just like his single-word-answers press conference worked the other day. Nobody would ever hear his message otherwise and now look at the coverage it has gotten.
The question is whether the Uncle Tom part of the message, which does feel wrong, turned off everyone from the rest of the message. If it did turn everyone off, all he lost was what remained of his reputation, because nobody would have heard his message otherwise anyway. I think he is perfectly OK with sacrificing personal reputation in furtherance of his message. He knows he can't ever get elected anyway, so he doesn't have to preserve his image. And I think he feels the cause he advocates for is much more important than preserving his reputation and respect. Because of this, he can talk about critical issues that no mainstream candidate can risk talking about if they want to get elected. That's his only role - to inject issues into a campaign discourse that is largely composed of things like Bill Ayers, wardrobegate, and catchphrases. So if any of the people who heard the message got past the Uncle Tom part and thought about the plight of the poor and their absence from the parts of the campaign that showed up in the media (not that you can't find them to a degree in official platform descriptions), then he achieved his goal. I think it only looks crazy to us because we'd never say something so incendiary and risk the inevitable condemnation and rejection, especially when Obama's election means so much to so many of us.
Irrespective of Nader, I'm not listening to any bullshit false moralizing from any fake-ass Fox News muppet. You want frequent racial insensitivity? Barely concealed racism? That joke of a network is a nest of it, a proud trumpeter of it. Those people are the real enemy. It makes me want to hurl when they pretend to adopt any kind of moral high ground. That Shep whatshisface was totally playing a fake PC role in that exchange. Ugh, his tone! Does he think his viewers are children? Does he think anyone believes that he cares about Nader's legacy? I bet he goes to the studio breakroom and joins Cavuto in his rants about how poor minorities caused the financial meltdown. Assholes.
posted by Eric at 10:37 AM on November 6, 2008
Nader, anyone who voted for him, is a stupid jerkass.
posted by BradOFarrell at 12:57 PM on November 6, 2008
i'm with eric, if you are agreeing with a blockhead fox newscaster you need to check yourself...nader is no more off the deep end than he has ever been, he is simply being his usual near-asperger's level of singlemindedness and obsession.
posted by cynthia at 11:42 AM on November 7, 2008
That Nader did not, in fact, cost Gore the 2000 election is a pretty indisputable fact for everyone except bitter Clintonites and, well, Eric Alterman. Repeating this absurdity ad nauseum is simply stooping to Fox News levels. I did not vote for Nader, and am unhappy with his unwillingness to extend even a modicum of grace to Obama... however, that doesn't justify maligning a man who has done a fucking lot for Americans. He's like Kucinich: batshit crazy, but I'm bloody glad he's around.
posted by Kevin at 2:30 AM on November 8, 2008
NOTE: The commenting window has expired for this post.
