What brings out the Ralph Nader in us?
This weekend I watched the documentary "Ralph Nader; An unreasonable man". I have to admit I was jolted by many of the facts presented. The piece was most unbiased in delivery and I found myself perplexed by the mindset of the voting mainstream in the U.S.
Some staggering items I was unaware of included The fact that General Motors hired women to approach him in Supermarkets with the lowest of intentions in an effort to smear his public image and had men follow him around in the sixties looking to ruin him. He successfully sued GM for invasion of privacy and they admitted thier wrongdoing and inadvertantly ended up funding more of his activities with proceeds form said lawsuit. None of this seems shocking except for the fact that it happened it the sixties before most corporations played the music for the dark hidden agenda dance contest.
I was shocked that the commission for deciding who is allowed to debate in public forums to become president was so frightened of his debating skills that they had the police threaten to arrest him despite being presented with a ticket to attend on television.
This two party "debate" between candidates that avoid the big issues like capital punishment and abortion and the rest have their campaigns paid for by companies in the oil trade.
It's democracy for sale to the highest bidder and when a rare honest candidate shows up, the media presents him as a radical. Ross Perot was "crazy" and Nader was "a dangerous radical".
More dangerous than Bush? I laugh.
Nader had a history of taking on the establishment in peaceful ways, he is the reason there is a seat belt in your car, and he wanted to give the U.S. decent health care system have bg businesses pay the similar shares of taxes that they did in the flourishing sixties.
He questioned why stock market purchasing has no taxes but food and other urgent items do..
Nader pointed out the economy needs to be designed and that people could a far superior transit system that would relieve hours of bumper to bumper traffic so people could spend time with their families.
If businesses didn't dodge their tax responsibilities with offshore accounts, handouts, escrow accounts and all the other loopholes that would account for 250 million back into the budget.
On the downside, I think he was too old when he ran and the media painted as some sort of mild heretic at minimum,
I was also surprised at all the turncoats in his platform from 2000 who cheered him on and threew him to the wolves in 2004.
Michael Moore in 2000 : "If you choose between the lesser of two evils you are still choosing evil" robustly urging voters to follow the more noble minded Nader and then makes this comment in the next election.
"You want to vote for Ralph because he is PUUUURRRRE and that will make you feel good.
Well your parents told you when you were 14 ho much trouble five minutes of feeling good can cause..
Bill Maher, Suzan Sarrandon, all dropped their support when they realized he be little more than a spoiler.
It makes sense if one is anti-Bush but what about the paltfoirm, the issues and the highly intelligent thinking?
Why is it people so drastically fear positive change?
A consumer Advocate vs. an autocrat.
I heard so many people justifying not voting for him as though he were some sort of lunatic when all he has ever done in his life is look out for the entire population often at great personal risk.
Sounds like good leadership to me.
Of course none of this matters now, But I am completely baffled at how such a man with a lifetime of incredible integrity and achievement was not taken more seriously by the American voters.
I think he would have doe incredible things unlike George Bush who among other things appointed Ken Lay of Enron as the energy commissioner.
I learned this while watching the Enron Documentary and when one learnes what they did to the State of California while Bush turned his back it's even more staggering.
I guess we are so jaded by politicians and used to them taking advantage of us that we wouldn't dare get our hopes by allowing people of integrity into office.
All he ever accomplished was safer cars, less dangerous toys for infants, safer food, warnings on drug labels, cigarette packages and more along those lines than I could list.
A man with a history of improving the standards of health and safety in U.S and worldwide while never being more than a mere individual, one wonders what he might done if had the authority to make his beliefs count while in office.
Ralph Nader got 2.7 percent of the vote while someone who can barely string together a sentence in correct English gets elected twice.
Someone once told me "at the end of the day, most people vote for candidate who looks best on camera"
Arnold Schwarzeneggar probably has quite a future.
What brings out the Ralph Nader in us? Nothing it seems.
Some staggering items I was unaware of included The fact that General Motors hired women to approach him in Supermarkets with the lowest of intentions in an effort to smear his public image and had men follow him around in the sixties looking to ruin him. He successfully sued GM for invasion of privacy and they admitted thier wrongdoing and inadvertantly ended up funding more of his activities with proceeds form said lawsuit. None of this seems shocking except for the fact that it happened it the sixties before most corporations played the music for the dark hidden agenda dance contest.
I was shocked that the commission for deciding who is allowed to debate in public forums to become president was so frightened of his debating skills that they had the police threaten to arrest him despite being presented with a ticket to attend on television.
This two party "debate" between candidates that avoid the big issues like capital punishment and abortion and the rest have their campaigns paid for by companies in the oil trade.
It's democracy for sale to the highest bidder and when a rare honest candidate shows up, the media presents him as a radical. Ross Perot was "crazy" and Nader was "a dangerous radical".
More dangerous than Bush? I laugh.
Nader had a history of taking on the establishment in peaceful ways, he is the reason there is a seat belt in your car, and he wanted to give the U.S. decent health care system have bg businesses pay the similar shares of taxes that they did in the flourishing sixties.
He questioned why stock market purchasing has no taxes but food and other urgent items do..
Nader pointed out the economy needs to be designed and that people could a far superior transit system that would relieve hours of bumper to bumper traffic so people could spend time with their families.
If businesses didn't dodge their tax responsibilities with offshore accounts, handouts, escrow accounts and all the other loopholes that would account for 250 million back into the budget.
On the downside, I think he was too old when he ran and the media painted as some sort of mild heretic at minimum,
I was also surprised at all the turncoats in his platform from 2000 who cheered him on and threew him to the wolves in 2004.
Michael Moore in 2000 : "If you choose between the lesser of two evils you are still choosing evil" robustly urging voters to follow the more noble minded Nader and then makes this comment in the next election.
"You want to vote for Ralph because he is PUUUURRRRE and that will make you feel good.
Well your parents told you when you were 14 ho much trouble five minutes of feeling good can cause..
Bill Maher, Suzan Sarrandon, all dropped their support when they realized he be little more than a spoiler.
It makes sense if one is anti-Bush but what about the paltfoirm, the issues and the highly intelligent thinking?
Why is it people so drastically fear positive change?
A consumer Advocate vs. an autocrat.
I heard so many people justifying not voting for him as though he were some sort of lunatic when all he has ever done in his life is look out for the entire population often at great personal risk.
Sounds like good leadership to me.
Of course none of this matters now, But I am completely baffled at how such a man with a lifetime of incredible integrity and achievement was not taken more seriously by the American voters.
I think he would have doe incredible things unlike George Bush who among other things appointed Ken Lay of Enron as the energy commissioner.
I learned this while watching the Enron Documentary and when one learnes what they did to the State of California while Bush turned his back it's even more staggering.
I guess we are so jaded by politicians and used to them taking advantage of us that we wouldn't dare get our hopes by allowing people of integrity into office.
All he ever accomplished was safer cars, less dangerous toys for infants, safer food, warnings on drug labels, cigarette packages and more along those lines than I could list.
A man with a history of improving the standards of health and safety in U.S and worldwide while never being more than a mere individual, one wonders what he might done if had the authority to make his beliefs count while in office.
Ralph Nader got 2.7 percent of the vote while someone who can barely string together a sentence in correct English gets elected twice.
Someone once told me "at the end of the day, most people vote for candidate who looks best on camera"
Arnold Schwarzeneggar probably has quite a future.
What brings out the Ralph Nader in us? Nothing it seems.