I received the following e-mail this morning about the
rally on Saturday in D.C., where I'll be joining thousands of my closest
DFH friends:

Three days until the Sept. 15 March to Stop the War! ~ Partial list of speakers ~ Sign up to volunteer ~ On Saturday, September 15, tens of thousands of people will gather at 12:00 noon on the north side of the White House, in and around Lafayette Park. Following the rally at the White House, participants will march to the Capitol Building. When the march arrives at Congress, thousands of people will participate in a Die-In/Funeral to dramatically represent the thousands of U.S. and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives lost in Iraq. Those not in the Die-In can participate in a legally permitted rally. Speakers at the White House rally will include: Ralph Nader Malik Rahim, Founder, Common Ground Collective, New Orleans Cindy Sheehan, Co-Founder, Gold Star Families for Peace Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general Adam Kokesh, Iraq Veterans Against the War - Tina Richards, CEO, Grassroots America
Mahdi Bray, Executive Director, Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation Mounzer Sleiman, Vice-Chair, National Council of Arab Americans - Etan Thomas, Washington Wizards Basketball Player
& many other veterans, family members, anti-war, student and community leaders!
|
Hang on a second ... did you say
Ralph Nader?? The man whose colossal ego and unwillingness to accept logic and reality in large part (though, admittedly, not singlehandedly) led to the mess we're in to begin with?
I find this appalling ... doesn't anyone pay attention to history? Sure, he may be a fine advocate for peace, but mostly he's a fine advocate for
himself. And those of us who are coming to Washington to demand change have to put up with this asshat?
Spare me the starry-eyed rhetoric. I know Ralph thought he was doing the right thing. But he knew that his candidacy in 2000 would pull votes from Al Gore, and no matter how you want to argue the point, the final Florida tally (Katherine Harris-approved, I know, but it's in the books) says that Nader drew almost 100,000 votes, which in a margin of 537 for
Drunky McStagger literally made all the difference.
Forgive me if I don't applaud Nader on Saturday. I don't know if I'll boo or turn my back or what, but I'll make my feelings known. Your mileage may vary, but I'm going to express myself. Deal with it.
UPDATE (11:23 am 9/12/07): Commenter TA
chimes in:
Sinfonian said, "Hang on a second ... did you say Ralph Nader?? The man whose colossal ego and unwillingness to accept logic and reality in large part (though, admittedly, not singlehandedly) led to the mess we're in to begin with?"
You are not being fair to Nader or his supporters. The 2000 election went to Bush in large part because 50,460,110 people (47.87%) voted for him. And the 2000 election went to Bush in large part because Al Gore didn't even win his home state of Tennessee. And the 2000 election went to Bush because Gore's selection for VP was a lame duck. And the 2000 election went to Bush because Gore conceded too easily.
It's easy to tag Nader as the scapegoat of the 2000 election, but it's certainly not fair or logical. The majority of the blame for the mess we're in should be placed on BUSH.
As for Nader, I'll probably vote for him or some other third party candidate if Clinton gets the nomination.
And I respond:
You are not being fair to Nader or his supporters.
On the contrary -- I think I am being more than fair. I said "I know Ralph thought he was doing the right thing" and "The man whose colossal ego and unwillingness to accept logic and reality in large part (though, admittedly, not singlehandedly) led to the mess we're in to begin with?" That's fair to say, IMO.
The 2000 election went to Bush in large part because 50,460,110 people (47.87%) voted for him.
True, but more people voted for Gore. And more people in Florida would have voted for Gore than for Bush had Nader not been in an unwinnable race. If you would like to argue that issue, feel free, but it's a non-starter.
And the 2000 election went to Bush in large part because Al Gore didn't even win his home state of Tennessee.
I agree, that was pathetic.
And the 2000 election went to Bush because Gore's selection for VP was a lame duck.
Well, I sort of agree; we didn't know then what we know now about Lieberman, unfortunately.
And the 2000 election went to Bush because Gore conceded too easily.
Wrong. It went to Bush because Katherine Harris was a Bush campaign chair, and because five SCOTUS Justices (notably O'Connor) ignored the facts and the law.
You just keep deceiving yourself if you want, and I said from the start that reasonable minds may differ, but in my opinion, Ralph Nader has no business being at this rally Saturday, nor anywhere near politics, for that matter.
Naderites certainly are persistent, aren't they?
UPDATE (4:35 pm 9/12/07): The debate continues below in Comments (or, as we like to call them here, "Blasts").
Labels: 2000, Al Gore, George W. Bush, Katherine Harris, personal, Ralph Nader, September 15