Comments on: Chris Bowers is a Narcissistic Megalomaniac Who Destroyed Single Payer — And I Helped

By: libbyliberal

libbyliberal — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:19:42 +0000

Don’t let one emotional thread wet-blanket you, youmayberight. Sometimes things do and should come to a head. I like your comment about who our friends are!

Thanks for posting and being so honest, and see you on campus. :)

By: libbyliberal

libbyliberal — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:17:25 +0000

I think Nader is also a Peter Pan man. Most comfortable with the youth. I looked into working for him at one point and he had college kids passing out soap to “clean up the govt” which was funny, but I wanted something deeper to work with, and felt his comfort zone of workers were adoring college kids, though I didn’t push harder to explore it.

By: youmayberight

youmayberight — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 05:34:22 +0000

I’m new to this computer world, and this is the only “comments” section of this length that I’ve managed to get through. I didn’t fully understand many of the comments, but reading the whole thing depressed me. I don’t mean to minimize serious differences with a “Can’t we all just get along” mantra. I’m generally of the “Be realistic; demand the impossible” school, but even though these tactical — and even strategic — differences are important, we have to remember who our friends are.

By: newtonusr

newtonusr — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 05:09:06 +0000

He has a sharp detector, no doubt.
I heard him speak at a trial lawyers dinner in the Bay Area a million years ago, maybe ‘82 or ‘82 – he was tremendous.

By: libbyliberal

libbyliberal — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 05:06:10 +0000

thanks, newt. Yeah, I was devastated when Bush won the first time and the second time I really had the VAPORS!

Ralph seems to espouse having to “hit bottom” … at some point to wake up the masses. It is a trap. Teddy admitted he should have compromised with Nixon but was too perfectionistic about healthcare.

And I see old Nader’s raiders interviewed on tv and there is such love/hate toward Nader it dismays. But I think the man has an incredible bull shit detector and speaks his truth to power. He has the heart of a reformer. I think Kucinich and Feingold have that, too. Feingold voted to impeach Clinton. I am sure that alienated him from party … forever in some ways …. but he was sure no crony and voted. Not defending him on that. But it was his honest belief.

I am hungry for someone who has moral clarity. Not faux religious hypocritical moral popping off, but true moral clarity. I hoped Obama had that and had the sense of empowerment from the populace to give him permission to exercise it.

JFK was overwhelmed by the military players when he came into office and they got him into project mongoose in Cuba and that was a mess and he was sorry he was so reactive to them and not more his own man. Having Bobby join him gave him more grounding in dealing with that pressure. Obama probably whammied by those “daddies” who are so entrenched, too, on Wall St. and military.

By: newtonusr

newtonusr — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 04:54:02 +0000

Analysis is correct, in my opinion.
Practicable solution - Ralph has his pockets turned out.

He is all for tearing down a broken system, and thinks tearing it down is the answer/solution.

In this, he and I are in disagreement.

By: libbyliberal

libbyliberal — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 04:50:23 +0000

I’m thinking Ralph Nader was more correct than I realized way back in 2000 when we he said that both parties were CORPORATISTS and little difference, the fix was in … there WAS less difference in them than I realized! Am seeing that as corruption has really proliferated into shock and awe devastation on people’s livelihoods and homes.

And I guess I see single payer being blacked-out the same way Nader gets blacked-out by media and crony parties because he does speak truth to power.

Nihilist who got countless regulations for the common good and then had to torturously watch Reagan and Bushco and Norquist etc. dismantle them. The Regressives.

I admire Ralph. And I am swayed by his health care opinions.

By: sporkovat

sporkovat — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 03:56:28 +0000

Donny: Are these the Nazis, Walter?

Walter Sobchak: No, Donny, these men are nihilists. There’s nothing to be afraid of.

from a great movie called The Big Lebowski - people with a sense of humor have heard of it.

I don’t care if Nader is a nihilist or a nudnik or a nudist, I never bring Nader into things.

Democratic apologists frequently respond to the stimulus of [criticism of ‘more and better Democrats, vote (D) no matter what] with the response of [thanksRalph! GWBush, Repub funding of Pennsylvania Greens in 2004, etc].

it seems to be a vestigial, but strong reflex reaction.

By: newtonusr

newtonusr — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 03:44:37 +0000

Back for more of this?
The strange part is, Nader is a nihilist, and his supporters know it.

Using him as the datum-point of reform is misleading at best, and mindless at worst.

By: sporkovat

sporkovat — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 03:39:41 +0000

sorry I missed the stomping!

but here’s a late reply to that little outbreak of fainting Naderitis around posts 39-45.

er, nowhere was it touted that the strategy of “…achieving progressive change by electing ‘more and better Democrats” has had any successes.

the counterclaim from JH was:

I’m operating on the premise that at least the possibility for change now exists. If I didn’t think that was true, I wouldn’t waste my time.

my emphasis.

ok. but really, not such a towering summit of success from which to sneer at failed strategies, is it?

The possibility for change always exists, but there is not much evidence that the Democratic Party of 2009 is an agent of positive change, rather than an impediment.

feel free to whack me with that evidence any time you feel like it, rather than just reflexively whingeing about Ralph Nader in election 2000.

(hey remember Joe Lieberman, Gore’s candidate for VP in 2000? d’you think his unctuousness maybe had more to do with good old Al’s loss than ‘thanksRalph?’)