Nader:B prepared to be very disappointed..

MrBrian

with Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE7PFbK5L88&feature=related

Rhinocerous Surprise

Notice how this well-spoken, on-the-money speech fails to make major news channels. Quelle surprise.

flywallyfly

The true reason for Nader's hate of Obama happens early in the video ---> Obama's refusal to meet with him, as if everyone should meet with Ralph Nader the King. He said the exact thing about Gore not meeting with him so he decided to attack him as well. Egomaniac.

prytoj

Pointing out Obama's decision making based on political expedience is well taken, but everytime Nader says something that makes sense, he soon thereafter says something that is so intellectually dishonest it's frightening. He couldn't stop himself in this piece either.

I posted a Cspan interview he had with Tabitha Soren, before the election, that echoed the sentiments about Obama's campaign finance. But the left are not hearing it.

I like Nader as a watchdog, and when he says something's not right I take a listen, but some of his ideology is looney-toons.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

whats newsworthy? he's been harping on the democrats for years. and all that speech really said was that oBAMA didnt have enough of a forceful personality to get anything done. he may be right, but Nader's forceful personality and combative nature hasnt had any impact in decades either.

i'll wait to see what happens. but as a general rule, i think pragmatism trumps fundamentalism in the long run.

plus, his name is Ralph. i mean come on, who's gonna listen to a guy named Ralph?

MrBrian

flywallyfly wrote:

Obama's refusal to meet with him, as if everyone should meet with Ralph Nader the King..

Nader was running for President, has a long and solid history of improving America for Americans. His views and ideas are sound.

For Obama to claim to listen to all sides, then constantly refuse to meet Nader, yes that is a problem and indeed does show the type of charater he
(Obama) really is.

nothinghead

Not totally on topic, but I've had at least a half dozen friends who live in/vote in overwhelmingly blue states tell me something to the effect, "Well, Obama is clearly going to win here, so he doesn't really need my vote. I'm going to vote for Nader instead."

Why don't people on the hard left seem able to differentiate between the two? Their ideas aren't particularly similar, their personalities aren't...yet some people seem to see them as two sides of the same coin.

I think Nader's criticisms are at times valid...right before they teeter into the absurd. But it's an interesting voice none the less and one that probably should be heard by so-called liberals. As much as I don't really like him that much as a figure, I would have preferred some third party candidates in the debates, including Nader. Of course, anyone who wants to know what Ralph Nader thinks--as limited as that audience is--knows exactly where to find him.

decides2dream

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

Notice how this well-spoken, on-the-money speech fails to make major news channels. Quelle surprise.

why should it?
a former candidate offers his personal opinions on the president-elect...so what? if he didn't garner coverage BEFORE the election, why in the world would anyone imagine he'd get any time now? not saying it's right or wrong...just seems obvious to me.


i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

MrSmith wrote:

whats newsworthy? he's been harping on the democrats for years. and all that speech really said was that oBAMA didnt have enough of a forceful personality to get anything done. he may be right, but Nader's forceful personality and combative nature hasnt had any impact in decades either.

i'll wait to see what happens. but as a general rule, i think pragmatism trumps fundamentalism in the long run.

plus, his name is Ralph. i mean come on, who's gonna listen to a guy named Ralph?

MrBrian

decides2dream wrote:

i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

I encourage you to check it out.

Nader has offered words of encouragment to Obama, but Obama has already made bad choices. He has already said some things that show him going down a bad path. Things I have talked about in previous threads.

and he is not even President yet. It must make you wonder, and waiting may be too late, we need to go after him now.

Infact we shouldve been demanding things from Obama even before he was president-elect. But we gave him a free pass to the white house because we were too scared of having McCain/Palin.

Rhinocerous Surprise

decides2dream wrote:

why should it?
a former candidate offers his personal opinions on the president-elect...so what? if he didn't garner coverage BEFORE the election, why in the world would anyone imagine he'd get any time now? not saying it's right or wrong...just seems obvious to me.


i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

My point was, when Nader says something about Obama that makes Nader look bad, people were all over it. Now that he's saying something that makes Obama look bad, people don't even click on the clip, never mind it making national news.

decides2dream

MrBrian wrote:

I encourage you to check it out.

Nader has offered words of encouragment to Obama, but Obama has already made bad choices. He has already said some things that show him going down a bad path. Things I have talked about in previous threads.

and he is not even President yet. It must make you wonder, and waiting may be too late, we need to go after him now.

Infact we shouldve been demanding things from Obama even before he was president-elect. But we gave him a free pass to the white house because we were too scared of having McCain/Palin.

you're assuming my vote was one of fear, and i can assure you mine was not. i voted for obama b/c of the choices offered, for me, he was the best choice.

i rarely watch youtube clips, i far prefer reading, and aside for the occasional quick look-sees from home, 98% of the time..i read/post from work, and don't view youtube from work.

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

My point was, when Nader says something about Obama that makes Nader look bad, people were all over it. Now that he's saying something that makes Obama look bad, people don't even click on the clip, never mind it making national news.

i won't comment for others, all i can say is i didn't watch that clip either, merely commented on what was offered as content. so in either situation, i clicked on neither clip. and quite honestly, the election is over...so for me, anything nader has to say on it, on obama, is not national news, period.






btw - go after him now? he JUST got elected...hasn't even taken office! you want to 'go after him' go for it.

Anon

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

My point was, when Nader says something about Obama that makes Nader look bad, people were all over it. Now that he's saying something that makes Obama look bad, people don't even click on the clip, never mind it making national news.

I could say something about Obama and it wouldn't make national news. Why? Because nobody cares about me or what i say. Now, whether i think it's 'fair' or not, it's the same deal with Nader, he's simply become a vanity campaign. The saddest thing is that, instead of being remembered for his great consumer advocacy, some people will remember him as the grumpy old man who made the uncle tom comment the day after Obama was elected president. He knew what he was saying, he was offered a chance to retract, and he declined.

He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. And maybe that's his real failing, in not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president or saying controversial things.

He could always do an A-Rod. The news is all over that. Kind of silly eh? Or maybe not. I'd bang madonna too j/k..

Collin

decides2dream wrote:

why should it?
a former candidate offers his personal opinions on the president-elect...so what? if he didn't garner coverage BEFORE the election, why in the world would anyone imagine he'd get any time now? not saying it's right or wrong...just seems obvious to me.

i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

Speech was August 11, 2008.

Collin

Pj_Gurl wrote:

I could say something about Obama and it wouldn't make national news. Why? Because nobody cares about me or what i say. Now, whether i think it's 'fair' or not, it's the same deal with Nader, he's simply become a vanity campaign. The saddest thing is that, instead of being remembered for his great consumer advocacy, some people will remember him as the grumpy old man who made the uncle tom comment the day after Obama was elected president. He knew what he was saying, he was offered a chance to retract, and he declined.

d2d wrote:

not saying it's right or wrong...

You were not a presidential candidate, Pj_Gurl.

They blocked Ralph Nader from the debates, but they do put his "uncle tom" comment on national tv. Of course people will remember that comment, it's because that comment is fed to the people by the media. The rest he has to say is silenced.

And by the way, it's absolutely about whether it's fair or not... And it is absolutely wrong.

It's this mentality that will keep America where it is. You are the ones who are all about change; Well, is it fair to the people and to the third party candidates themselves that they are blocked form the debates? Yes or no? This is an issue, but it doesn't affect Obama or his supporters so I guess this can stay the way it is?

No need to change too much.

Anon

Collin wrote:

You were not a presidential candidate, Pj_Gurl.

They blocked Ralph Nader from the debates, but they do put his "uncle tom" comment on national tv. Of course people will remember that comment, it's because that comment is fed to the people by the media. The rest he has to say is silenced.

And by the way, it's absolutely about whether it's fair or not... And it is absolutely wrong.

It's this mentality that will keep America where it is. You are the ones who are all about change; Well, is it fair to the people and to the third party candidates themselves that they are blocked form the debates? Yes or no? This is an issue, but it doesn't affect Obama or his supporters so I guess this can stay the way it is?

No need to change too much.

Whoa whoa whoa....Get off your soap box with me. Right from the outset i have been outspoken on my view that Third Party candidates should be involved in the debates and have fair access to the media.

I'd love to see Nader on the spot. He says all the right things, and he talks about what we should do, but i honestly don't think he has any plan as to how he would follow through with what he is saying. Anyone can come out and say 'we should do this', but he never says how he would. The worst thing about Ralph Nader is that he has become irrelevant. He has done nothing to create a viable political alternative to the GOP and Dems, nor to build support for his positions among the electorate. Anyone could have predicted his position on the war, and nobody cared, because he has no effective base of support. His positions on the issues, no matter how good they sound, are useless because he has done nothing to achieve the power to implement them.

I've given the benefit of the doubt to Nader, and believed his intention of entering the election was primarily an attempt to structurally change the electoral process from a two-party system to a multi-candidate type of system, but the problem with Nader, and what makes it impossible to take his candidacy seriously, is that he himself puts forth the image that he just wants attention for being a spoiler rather than a serious candidate. again running for president or makaing . For all the accolades he get's for his progressive views, what good are they if he doesn't even make them known? He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. So i'll say it again, maybe his real failing is not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president OR coming out the day after the election making controversial comments.

Rhinocerous Surprise

Pj_Gurl wrote:

I could say something about Obama and it wouldn't make national news. Why? Because nobody cares about me or what i say. Now, whether i think it's 'fair' or not, it's the same deal with Nader, he's simply become a vanity campaign. The saddest thing is that, instead of being remembered for his great consumer advocacy, some people will remember him as the grumpy old man who made the uncle tom comment the day after Obama was elected president. He knew what he was saying, he was offered a chance to retract, and he declined.

He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. And maybe that's his real failing, in not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president or saying controversial things.

He could always do an A-Rod. The news is all over that. Kind of silly eh? Or maybe not. I'd bang madonna too j/k..

All I'm saying is, if people are gonna drag him over the coals for one off-colour (pun?) comment, they should at least give him the courtesy of listening to him when he's making valid points without questionable wordplay. He's either irrelevant - in which case, no one should care if he says "Uncle Tom" - or he's worth listening to, whether controversial or not.

flywallyfly

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

All I'm saying is, if people are gonna drag him over the coals for one off-colour (pun?) comment, they should at least give him the courtesy of listening to him when he's making valid points without questionable wordplay. He's either irrelevant - in which case, no one should care if he says "Uncle Tom" - or he's worth listening to, whether controversial or not.

Dont forget his other remark about Obama "talking white".

He IS irrelevant and the only reason he is getting any mention on here is there are two or three Nader supporters on this board so it is newsworthy on here, not so out in the real world.

MrBrian

flywallyfly wrote:

Dont forget his other remark about Obama "talking white".

He IS irrelevant and the only reason he is getting any mention on here is there are two or three Nader supporters on this board so it is newsworthy on here, not so out in the real world.

Ok, you dont like Nader. But can you really argue that his ideas and views are irrelevant?....

btw the point Nader made about "talking white" was valid. I mean give his explanation a chance. Again, maybe it was not the best choice of words. But that should not take away from the validity of it, of the point.

VictoryGin

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

All I'm saying is, if people are gonna drag him over the coals for one off-colour (pun?) comment, they should at least give him the courtesy of listening to him when he's making valid points without questionable wordplay. He's either irrelevant - in which case, no one should care if he says "Uncle Tom" - or he's worth listening to, whether controversial or not.

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

Rhinocerous Surprise

VictoryGin wrote:

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

As much as I appreciate the... vehemence... of your point, you completely missed mine. Of course people aren't going to care about Nader if all the news corps will do is introduce him as a spoiler and then accuse him of being a racist. If Nader isn't newsworthy, then don't have him on the news, racist comment or not. If he is newsworthy, then at least have the decency to show his ideas and valid criticisms.

MrBrian

VictoryGin wrote:

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

That was a really bad post, even yourself a few years ago would be disappointed with it....

Gin, You are nothing but a hypocrite.

decides2dream

Collin wrote:

Speech was August 11, 2008.

as i already stated, i had not watched the clip...thus had no idea. and if it's from august, why'd the OP wait until now to post?

Pj_gurl wrote:

Whoa whoa whoa....Get off your soap box with me. Right from the outset i have been outspoken on my view that Third Party candidates should be involved in the debates and have fair access to the media.

I'd love to see Nader on the spot. He says all the right things, and he talks about what we should do, but i honestly don't think he has any plan as to how he would follow through with what he is saying. Anyone can come out and say 'we should do this', but he never says how he would. The worst thing about Ralph Nader is that he has become irrelevant. He has done nothing to create a viable political alternative to the GOP and Dems, nor to build support for his positions among the electorate. Anyone could have predicted his position on the war, and nobody cared, because he has no effective base of support. His positions on the issues, no matter how good they sound, are useless because he has done nothing to achieve the power to implement them.

I've given the benefit of the doubt to Nader, and believed his intention of entering the election was primarily an attempt to structurally change the electoral process from a two-party system to a multi-candidate type of system, but the problem with Nader, and what makes it impossible to take his candidacy seriously, is that he himself puts forth the image that he just wants attention for being a spoiler rather than a serious candidate. again running for president or makaing . For all the accolades he get's for his progressive views, what good are they if he doesn't even make them known? He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. So i'll say it again, maybe his real failing is not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president OR coming out the day after the election making controversial comments.

some very solid points made. i won't rehash the whole issues of nader, i think we all have expressed our views on the cadidate often enough. obviously, it comes down to what you want, who you truly believe in AND believe can actually implement and affect change. now, the election is over...so nader in this instance is a moot point, no? not saying his ideas are invalid....but if you have no chance in implementing or influencing, it doesn't much matter..........

MrBrian

decides2dream wrote:

as i already stated, i had not watched the clip...thus had no idea. and if it's from august, why'd the OP wait until now to post?
..........

Because the points are still pertinent in regard to what direction Obama is going now, and what he is doing and saying.

The headline is 'be prepared to be very disappointed by Obama'
It would help if you watched the clip, it's not long, and comment on it.

Even if you supported Obama before he was elected, his latest moves in regard to his choices and his latest lack of moves in other issues are disappointing.

Well, for some anyway. How about for you? Are you happy he picked people who support the Iraq war? Israel blindly? Patriot Act? Are you happy that he is still saying propaganda in regard to Russia and Iran?...

Maybe you are not, maybe you support those things, maybe you just dont care? I dont know.

But if I supported someone who spoke of 'change' and a 'new direction'..I'd be pretty disappointed with that person right now.

flywallyfly

VictoryGin wrote:

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

Amen.

freindlyfired

Doesnt the current economic crisis validate what Nader has been saying for the past 13 years?

granted most people didnt and dont listen but thats not the point.

I can refresh your memories if you like...

Collin

decides2dream wrote:

as i already stated, i had not watched the clip...thus had no idea. and if it's from august, why'd the OP wait until now to post?

You said it's obvious they wouldn't give him airtime after the elections. I'm merely pointing out that the video was from during the elections precisely because you didn't watch the video.

not saying his ideas are invalid....but if you have no chance in implementing or influencing, it doesn't much matter..........

Obama ignored Nader, refused to meet with him. A more open minded attitude might give Obama a chance to work with Nader, or Nader with Obama, to affect changes in the fields they agree on.

If his ideas are valid the least Obama could do is listen, right? I don't know if it was you or someone else but, I remember someone said Nader isn't a leader, he has good, valid ideas but he's not a leader. Obama appear to be a leader... but a good leader listens and doesn't ignore people with good, valid ideas. I'm not even saying he should do anything, just listen.

But Obama has gathered a few other advisers and found a few people whom he is willing to listen to; sadly, their words and visions don't offer much change.

Collin

VictoryGin wrote:

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together.

Well, we both know that more than a few people care about what Nader is saying. It's also quite condescending of you to assume Nader supporters don't want to get this country back together, especially if you consider what Nader has been saying. Furthermore, your obvious attacks towards Nader supporters suggest that you're not actually trying to get this country back together. It's you Obama supporters against the rest, or so it seems.

Anyway, it saddens me that the new America doesn't care about:

Adopting single payer national health insurance
Cutting the huge, bloated, wasteful military budget
Aggressive crackdown on corporate crime and corporate welfare
Opening up the Presidential debates
Adopting a carbon pollution tax
Reversing U.S. policy in the Middle East
...

Opening up the debates is very important because one of the main reasons the US is divided is because it's divided into two groups: republicans and democrats. Obama aims to keep it that way.

But like you said, the people didn't listen to Nader, they listened to Obama and they'll get what they asked for, I guarantee: more war, more of the same bullshit. But don't worry, I'm sure something will change.

VictoryGin

Collin wrote:

Well, we both know that more than a few people care about what Nader is saying. It's also quite condescending of you to assume Nader supporters don't want to get this country back together, especially if you consider what Nader has been saying. Furthermore, your obvious attacks towards Nader supporters suggest that you're not actually trying to get this country back together. It's you Obama supporters against the rest, or so it seems.

this is hilarious. first of all, in regards to the nader supporters comments: i see them here. not in the real world working with others ("with others" is key) to accomplish some change. it seems to be all or nothing with them, as evidenced by this message board. it's not change if it's not nader. and other than that, it's just slamming obama, which indicates they don't want to work together either. not that i give a shit, because again this happens on a message board. this message board is not constructive in any way. there really is no point for anyone who actually wants to change things and be constructive unless you're taking a break from work. sharing of ideas? HA. everyone here is so fixed in their beliefs and aren't going to be swayed. it has become so ridiculous over the past few years. and it's so laughable to hear that YOU think I am not trying to get this country back together. you have absolutely no idea what i have accomplished in the real world.

MrBrian

VictoryGin wrote:

this is hilarious. first of all, in regards to the nader supporters comments: i see them here. not in the real world working with others ("with others" is key) to accomplish some change. it seems to be all or nothing with them, as evidenced by this message board. it's not change if it's not nader. and other than that, it's just slamming obama, which indicates they don't want to work together either. not that i give a shit, because again this happens on a message board. this message board is not constructive in any way. there really is no point for anyone who actually wants to change things and be constructive unless you're taking a break from work. sharing of ideas? HA. everyone here is so fixed in their beliefs and aren't going to be swayed. it has become so ridiculous over the past few years. and it's so laughable to hear that YOU think I am not trying to get this country back together. you have absolutely no idea what i have accomplished in the real world.

Maybe you are not deep enough in the real world to see them? I mean you use conjecture too much. Opinions and make them facts. You dont see them, so they are not doing anything. So its a fact that they dont work with others.

Is the criticism Of Obama not warranted? Are you really able to defend his stances and feelings towards many issues? Do you line up with them?

I believe you have done many things in the real world, so please share.
Lets talk about it, see where we can join forces. Let's right now in this time, really get open.

Let's make a change, a real change. Let's see what our differnces really are, see what we can do about them and move forward.

You are against the Iraq war right? What do you feel about Obama's choice of advisors? You want Iran to be attacked? What do you think about his words towards Iran? His use of the 'wipe Israel off the map' propaganda?

His Blind support of Israel, Rahms views on Israel. Patriot act? Russian aggression line, not being critical of Georgia.

Iran nuke comment when the latest news is the evidence may of been fabricated? What about Rahms thoughts on compulsory service? and he being the man who will help shape the new admin?

You think it was correct for Obama to be against a Bush impeachment saying that he felt that Bush did not do enough to get impeached?

I understand you are not happy with certain phrases and words Nader says, I understand that you feel that he does not compromise enough. But how do you feel about his views and ideas in general? Any of them you really strongly think he is wrong on?

Let's put it behind us and move forward.

This Board is not constructive? Let's make it constructive.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

I just watched his "this time must be different speech"

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gGxZHn

He didn't really even say anything we don't already know, or says catch phrases people can interpret to mean literally anything. It's all just hopeful, lofty and vague.

And the repetitive "yes we can" mantra thing was exactly like watching a preacher straight up.

It's all great, and wonderful (it really is), but I think there is a disconnect coming in the reality pipeline of what people were expecting at that speech, and what is going to be the reality in the middle east.

This time is going to be different....It will be Iran instead of Iraq. This time is going to be different....different how?

digster

Roland, do you really believe Obama will unilaterally and pre-empitvely attack Iran in the same fashion President Bush did with Iraq?