Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

Ron Paul fans, Ralph Nader wants your attention

Ron Paul backers, do not despair. You have a new suitor: Ralph Nader.

In the wake of the decision by the 72-year-old Paul to, viHow about a ticket of Rep. Ron Paul and Ralph Nader?a his website, officially declare an end to his presidential quest, the 74-year-old Nader showed a political agility that has not always marked his many, many runs for the White House. Today, he released the following statement:

"Ron Paul was a lightning rod for millions of Americans against the war in Iraq and for the protection of personal liberties that the two major parties have turned their back on -- by continuing to support the illegal criminal war and the PATRIOT Act.

"Now that Dr. Paul has formally withdrawn his candidacy for the G.O.P. nomination and is no longer seeking the Presidency, there is a clear choice for those who want to support a candidate who will stand up against the war and stand up for personal liberties and privacy that have been trampled by the notorious, misnamed, PATRIOT Act.

"The people want the next President to immediately withdraw our soldiers and corporate mercenaries from Iraq in the safest manner possible.

"I would veto any attempt to extend the so-called PATRIOT Act or anything else that came across my desk that was designed to circumvent the civil liberties of the American People.

The PATRIOT Act grants excessive power to the government to abuse civil liberties through wiretaps, monitoring internet usage, authorized 'sneak and peek' of our homes, and forces libraries to turn over records of the books read by their patrons -- and those abuses of power have been used repeatedly by Bush and his Justice Department.

We need more politicians, like Dr. Paul, who are not afraid to stand up for our civil liberties."

Nader isn't quite as assertive on another of Paul's prime issues, the Federal Reserve Board.

Paul, much to the delight of many of his supporters, has pushed for wiping the board off the face of the earth; Nader's focus has been on prodding it to do its job with greater vigilance and more openly.

-- Don Frederick

Photo: Nick Wass / Associated Press

 
Comments () | Archives (86)

The comments to this entry are closed.

I truely believe that Nader is a good man who has not been corrupted. However he brings big government ideals and solutions to our countrys problems and that is exactly what we need to get away from.

Nader just doesn't get it ...it's the Federal Reserve duh! Printing money out of thin air irresponsibility is not cool... sending millions of jobs overseas is not cool...he gets it on many other issues, but us paultards are not ready to drive our Corvars down to the left wing retard party ...sorry ... nice try Ralph! Oh and the L.A. Times still sucks …

As a Ron Paul supporter, I think that most of us will have to go with Barr as he aligns more with Paul's ideals than Nader does. Just my humble opinion.

Thank you very much Mr. Nader but we would also like a much smaller government.

Ideologically incomputable! LA Times, I thought you knew?
Nader is good man, my respects.

Nader? Better than the two clowns the MSM have so carefully worked for us to have, but no thanks. He is not the answer.

Is Nader that stupid? Or just desperate? Either way, he clearly doesn't get it:

Ron Paul's attraction is that he wants government out of our lives -- ALL of our lives. Nader's platform of restoring civil liberties and ending the Iraq war doesn't scratch the surface; he still wants to run every facet of our lives, from how many MPG our cars must get, to taking away our right to own guns, to forcing government-run health care on everyone.

Mr. Nader, you will never get my vote.

Not only does Nader still need to get on ballots (which would be quite a headache, especially here in N.C.), he also needs to prove that he is a better choice than Bob Barr - the former Republican Congressman turned Libertarian.

Watch his interview with Glenn Beck. Most Ron Paul supporters would pick Barr over Nader any day.

Nader vs. Barr = Centralization vs. Decentralization

I know I'm not the only Ron Paul Republican who will be voting Barr.

He wants our attention but he's not going to get it!

He's a died in the wool communist don't forget!

He's not as bad as Obama but almost!

Forget it, we don't care what Nader wants.

Ralph Nader has devoted 40 plus years fighting the elite
and powerful interests (corporations, lobbyists) when
those interest trample on the citizenry.

Ralph will assemble a team dedicated to purging D.C. from it current status of
"Corporate Occupied Territory".

Whose side are you on?

Nader/Gonzales-2008 . . . or . . . .

Corporate Greed, Power and Control:

Agr-Business, Big-Banks, Private-Equity, HMOs,
Union Busters, NAFTA, Globalizaiton Illegal Immigration, Low Wages, High Energy, Food etc.

On the contrary, he will get BIG-Govt, BIG-OIL, BIG-Banks etc. pared back and stop this
premeditated massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the so called .. . (elites- phew).

Nader has got to be kidding! The man is a flaming exponent of huge government and nothing in his record suggests he's ever even read the Constitution.

From what I've heard of Nader, he's a good independent voice and from the videos I've seen of the man, he is very calm and well spoken. I don't much agree with his (Nader's) methodology for correction of Big Gov, but I believe he is an honest man. He is worth listening to.
However, having dedicated much effort and time to the RP campaign this last year, the good doctor will be getting my vote in November.

Good blog post.

Thanks Mr. Nader,

I'll be going to Bob Barr, but I appreciate your consideration. Perhaps your concerns could be addressed in the Libertarian tent as well.

If Nader- or any candidate for public office- want the votes of the Revolution, they know what our agenda is.
The US Constitution has no allowances for the Patriot Act, the Federal Reserve, undeclared pre-emptive wars, torture, nor the hoarding of power by the executive branch and the bloating of the federal government.
When- exactly- did our most treasured document come to be seen as ideas of the "fringe", "wackos", or "extremists"?
When did the utter insanity of powers-that-be become "normal', "business as usual"?
It is early in the movement, but we will have candidates willing to follow these simple principles, and many informed and eager citizens lining-up to support and vote for them.

I agree with the post by Michael Cathcart, Nader, while much better than what we're used to, is still a big government junkie who would unwittingly turn over more freedoms and responsibilities to state power while trying to combat the most overt abuses.

In order to right this ship, we're going to need a complete 360 degree return to Constututional principles, and that begins with a return to sound monetary policy and a legalization of competitive forms of currency.

The legal tender laws need to be wiped off the books...then you won't have to abolish the Federal Reserve, it will collapse of its own accord beause it didn't offer the people anything but inflation and misery.

Next step is abolishing the federal income tax. This feudalistic tax only enables those who use the federal government for personal gain. You want to remove corporate lobbyists? You want to stamp out the military industrial complex, leftists? This is the place to start.

If you subsidize something, you get more of it. That's what Ron Paul always says. We're subsidizing lack of personal responsibility for our own futures, and we're getting more of it. We're subsidizing war and getting more of it. We're subsidizing inefficiency and quackery in government and creating laws that protect this inefficiency. Only by removing the the funding of all this misguided madness will we fix the problem.

It's kinda like weening someone off crack. We have to ween BIG GOVERNMENT off our money!

I am a Ron Paul Republican and will probably vote for Nader this time out. I don't agree with all his solutions, but at least we agree on what the problems are.

We aren't left in despair, this is a Revolution, not another election.

This began with Ron Paul & Ends With Us.

" Every Generation Needs A Revolution "

- Thomas Jefferson

I like Nader too. I believe he is a man of integrity and principal. However, I simply cannot agree with his economic and general "Big Government" solutions to the country's problems.

Granted, he would be miles better than any of the other choices save Barr or Baldwin of course.

Ralph Nader should endorse Bob Barr. As should Chuck Baldwin. Joining those three. America has had enough or this war, or the loss of personal freedoms and civil liberties.
We don't want what will be here in 20 years. Bob Barr has the best chance to help bring this country back in this election. Most of all. Elect congressmen, senators, assemblymen, and councilmen with these views.

The R[EVOL]UTION lives on.

Yeah, I'll look into Nader. I like him, but he's no Ron Paul, for reasons eloquently stated by Michael Cathcart.

If all of these 3rd party fringe candidates that pop up every 4 or 8 years, and the mass of political independents, would just focus on an open primary with IRV/Ranked choice, then everyone could vote their conscience, have a vote that actually counts, AND we would have an accurate picture of political sentiment in this country.

Our electoral system is a couple hundred years out of date...

It's as easy as 1,2,3....

Abandon your go-nowhere candidates -- FIX THE SYSTEM.

Freedom is a powerful word. It strikes fear in those who would prevent it and creates courage in those who would have it.

Freedom is a powerful word. It strikes fear in those who would prevent it and creates courage in those who would have it.

Nader just generalizes, nothing about adhering to the constitution. Not a chance in hell. I will stick with RP.

What a joke. The option now for Paul supporters is Bob Barr. If you like him, check out http://www.barrbomb.com for a Ron Paul style money bomb.

I will be writing Dr. Paul's name in regardless of the fact that he has officially suspended one campaign and started a new one. www.campaignforliberty.com

BUT, I have a lot of respect for Mr. Nadar. His philosophies do not completely align with mine so I will not be placing a vote for him, but we need more people like Nadar, Paul, Kucinich, Sanford, Flake and others that put integriy before politics.

Good Luck RN!

Hopefully our unfunded liabilities, the destruction of our currency and the mangled, trampled thing that is our reputation around the world will hold out long enough to allow a Reagan (one that actually follows his platform) to spring forth from Ron Paul's Goldwateresque movement. It definitely won't be coming from a big government liberal like Nader.

I'll go with Chuck Baldwin, before I go with Nader. Although I was proud to take abuse campaigning for Ralph in '00 and '04, I'll be sitting this one out after working for Paul this year. Ralph is for the 1984 big brother government health care, and for eroding our soverignity to non governmental organizations that like his citizens groups, micromanage what you can and can not do with your own property and personal liberty. I have learned in the past year thanks to Dr. Paul just how offensive that truly is, and can't bring myself to support his advocacy for such policies. I salute Ralph's record of public service and feel that he has been an essental impact for good in our daily lives; And I further support his will to run as to advocate "more choices and more voices" in the political arena. But I simply can't support his aborgation of national soverignity and state's right to control our bodies through nationalized health care. That being said, thanks for running Ralph, and I look forward to seeing you debate in whatever forum I can find online, since the MSM won't interview you in depth or any of there networks. Best of luck and keep fighting the good fight, your are an inspiration to many still. And your impact will never be forgotten.

Nader has been critical of the Fed. If you search the Naderite website CounterPunch for nader and "federal reserve," you should find numerous things he's written against the fed.

I won't vote for Barr because I don't trust him in the slightest. He was a leader in the War on (some) Drugs, voted for the Patriot Act and Iraq War (and he has never advocated a total repeal of the Patriot Act), supports harassment of Iran by the US government, and advocates sending teenagers who have consensual underage sex to jail (search his website for "Genarlow Wilson").

I do like Baldwin and Nader about the same, but I'm going with Nader at the moment because he's more electable. Hopefully, Ron Paul runs in 2012 either challenging President McCain in the primaries or President Obama in the general. By then, the demographics will have shifted to such an extent that Dr. Paul will be able to compete at the same level.

Ditto most of the comments above about Nader: good, honest man, but too far into government as the solution, even if he'll fight it in ways most of the establishment picks won't.

But now here's a question: if he's that respectful of Paul, would he choose him as a running mate?

Better question: if he does, would/should Paul say yes?

Ralph Nader agrees with Dr Paul that big government is full of waste and needs to be scaled back in many areas--most of all the bloated US military budget which is half of the government's total operating budget.


Ralph Nader is also against big government doling out billions in corporate welfare to companies that are already making billions.

Ralph Nader supports abolishing income tax on the first 50k of income to be made up with a fraction of a per cent wall street speculation tax.

It is true that Ralph Nader does not agree with Paul on two key issues:

Ralph Nader believes that healthcare and prisons should not be privatized, because each have a special nature that are not as readily adaptable to the free market.
Big private prisons have an interest in lobbying for three strikes and your out type laws that lock up Americans as it's good for business.

Ralph Nader is for getting rid of the fraud and waste that exist in the corporatized HMO dominated US sickcare system.Ralph Nader believes healthcare is a right. In a civilized society, there is no reason why tens of millions should not have healthcare.

In trying to maximize their profits, Big HMOs have an incentive to find loopholes to deny coverage and to impose cumbersome paperwork requirements that make the US healthcare system the most wasteful in the world--25 per cent of every dollar spent on US healthcare is wasted in paper-pushing.


Bob Barr can't carry the baton for civil liberties, and ending the failed Iraq and drug wars, because:

Barr was a big supporter of the failed war on drugs.
Barr voted for the PATRIOT Act.
Barr voted for the Iraq war

Some things being overlooked here... Ralph Nader, first of all, has commanded my respect - as a libertarian - by being intellectually honest and not warping or twisting the perspectives, philosophies, or economics of libertarianism (left and right) as so many other leftists do. He has praised Ron Paul constantly throughout Paul's campaign and has declared on more than one occasion that Washington could use a "Ron Paul enema". Further, Ralph Nader is firmly opposed to the worst socialisms of all in our country: military socialism and corporate socialism.

Given Barr's wishy-washiness and the flat-out illibertarianism of his running mate, Wayne Allyn Root, who has declared himself pretty much interventionist in foreign policy and, even, domestic policy, count this as one anti-state Ron Paul supporter who finds Nader a far more appealing candidate than the opportunistic Barr and Root.

This campaign season is remarkable in that, for the first time in my lifetime, we had several credible anti-war candidates - Obama definitely not included - and that they all had nothing but praise for one another, that they did not contort themselves intellectually to misrepresent one another... Nader, Kucinich, Paul, McKinney, Gravel... regardless of socio-economic inclination there has been a distinct lack of friction between supposed competitors.

John V. Walsh, over at Counterpunch, has made a compelling pitch for Paul supporters to migrate over to the Nader camp and I find it well worth considering. Nader is more solid on the foreign policy (visit antiwar.com and accord yourself the privilege of seeing how badly Barr mangled the history of our Latin American interventions) and is more solid on untangling our web of corporate/military-industrial socialism.

Paul has laid the groundwork for further classical liberal activities. It's really quite incredible. However, in libertarianism, the right cannot be successful without the left. We've seen the awakening now of right-libertarianism. An additional renaissance of left-libertarianism and a reconciliation of the schism between the two would be a tremendous boon and would go a long way toward redirecting the militarist, imperial path that the U.S. has been skipping down for far too long in a direction far more peaceful, economic, and conducive for individual liberty. I think the Nader campaign could be a key asset here. I think it's wonderful that he's made the pitch.

Nader, like Dr Paul, believes that big government is full of waste and needs to be scaled back. Like the bloated military budget and doling out billions in corporate welfare.
Barr was a big supporter on the failed war on drugs and voted for the Patriot Act.
Nobody is entitled to my vote.

Nader disagrees with Paul on two key issues:
Ralph does not believe that health care and prisons should be privatized. Health care and prisons are not as readily adaptable to the free market.

I think Ralph Nader is a fine alternative for Ron Paul supporters.

Paul speaks against BIG GOVERNMENT. And contrary to what news bites and propaganda would have you believe, Nader is also against big government. Consider the enormously bloated military budget which accounts for nearly half of the government's total operating budget. This is a tremendous waste of taxpayer money going to imperial wars based on lies.

And as part of this war, we have more BIG GOVERNMENT in the form of citizen surveillance. The PATRIOT Act (which Barr VOTED FOR) grants the government unprecedented powers to watch over American citizens without the need to prove probable cause in the court system.

Nader is against big government when it is fraudulent, wasteful or illegal. He calls for end to the intrusive PATRIOT Act and a massive reduction in the military budget. He wants to put an end to the excess of corporate welfare and put and end to the intrusive, failing drug war.

Nader is against maximizing government and sees its role as simply protecting the rights and interests of citizens and society as a whole.

Nader courting Paulunteers?

HAHAHAHAHA!

He has about as much chance of getting us as McCain has of becoming natural born and Obama has of becoming substantive.

In other words, NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

I appreciate some of Ralph Nader's better points on many issues, but he just does not quite get it.

Chuck Baldwin or Bob Barr are the current alternative choices to Dr. Ron Paul as they understand what the problem is with big government.

Sorry Mr. Nader you strike out with me and countless others who understand the big picture. The Ron Paul alternative Candidate must apply the Ron Paul philosophy of Freedom, Peace, Prosperity.

Liberty cannot exist in a land where government is a tyrant and the people are subservient to it. It is always supposed to be the government serving the people and answerable to the people.

Ralph Nader is a political chameleon known as "the watermelon". He's GREEN ON THE OUTSIDE and RED IN THE MIDDLE!

By "red" I mean in the OLD sense of the word before the mainstream media decided to make it the exact opposite, deliberately. "Red" China, remember? That's what I mean.

Go Ron Paul! If we can't have Ron Paul, then go Bob Barr!

Libertarians ALL THE WAY!

ah yes, this is almost as sad and misguided as mike gravel running on the libertarian ticket. oh well, at least we don't have andrew malcolm to kick around anymore. . .

At some point the two wings of the anti-war movement need to converge.

The Left needs to realize that without a wholesale scaleback of the US's foriegn ambitions...nothing of value can happen domestically. They need to recognize that the decentralizing spirit of the Right is more likely to produce options that are currently unthinkable...say Single-Payer Health Care in California ...if the Federal Government continues to impose itself.

The Ron Paul Right needs to keep doing what its doing - but to reach out to the Greens and Nader supporters - and not be so spooked by their economics.

A good place to do that would be in Minneapolis in September. Invite Nader to the the Campaign for Liberty Convention, along with Cynthia McKinney, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr. Lets get a conversation going.

I would support Nader if he adopted more of Ron Pauls ideas.

Bob Bar is my second choice but im having a hard time supporting him since he suddenly changed his mind on foreign policy which is our number one concern.

You align yourself with Ron Paul Nader you have my vote. We want less taxes so that means less government spending. which your whole theme revolves around right now.

As a lifelong libertarian, I can honestly say that, without Ron Paul, the best candidate is Ralph Nader, not Bob Barr. Barr is far too recent a convert, and I am simply not ready to forgive him for supporting for the War in Iraq, the PATRIOT Act, the War on Drugs, the imprisonment of Genarlow Wilson, the prohibition of Wiccan practices in the military. All of these are highly illibertarian positions, and he has only renounced a couple of them. Plus, his running mate, Wayne Allyn Root, is about as libertarian as Neal Boortz.

Had the Libertarian Party nominated Dr. Mary Ruwart or Steve Kubby for president, I would have given them my unquestioning support. Instead, they nominated the conservative Republican-turned-Libertarian Bob Barr, whom I cannot trust. For the first time in my adult life, I will not be voting Libertarian in November. Nader has my vote.

Paul and Nader have seen their 15 minutes of fame pass them by........they are now considered history......

Are you kidding me? Ron Paul stands for real minimal government, Nader wants to triple federal spending on just about everything.....there is no comparison here. I cannot vote against my principles so Nader.....neither you, McCain, nor Obama will get my vote. I have a hard enough time trying to possibly vote for Barr. I want my vote to count but not towards these horrible candidates. Ron Paul republicans will be the only candidates worthy of getting my vote. Nader, go suck on the welfare state somemore......hopefully you will find that the bullcrap welfare state isn't to far behind the warfare state. It's crap like big government spending that builds up our centralized government, the first thing Americans should no about is the damage this does to our economy. Minimal constitutional government that protects EVERY single citizens individual rights is the best way to go. Ron Paul republicans only, not communist Nader!

Who's Ralph Nader?
Am I alone on this one? LOL
J/K, Mr. Nader is a good man but he needs to convince the American people where he stands on limited and constitutional goverment. And of the people and by the people. And it looks like quite a few posters above know clearly where he stands which in reverse of Dr. Paul.

Nope, No Nader, Sorry...

I am a Paul supporter, but rather than write him in I would much rather vote for Nader than Barr. Barr is not a libertarian in any way, was declared an enemy drug warrior just a few years ago by the national Libertarian Party and successfully removed from office by them. Barr got nominated by a hostile takeover by his henchmen at the national convention this year.

Both Ralph Nader and Bob Barr are just dying to siphon votes off of Ron Paul supporters, and I do not trust either's ulterior motives (especially creepy former CIA-member and pro-War on Drugs Barr and his war-mongering obnoxious sidekick Root). Is Barr a plant in the Libertarian Party to infiltrate and poison it? Is Nader paying McCain back for a favor by diverting votes from Democrats, as has been rumored?

It was not as crushingly sad a day as I thought it would be, when Ron Paul officially announced that his presidential campaign had ended. We all knew the primaries had been a sick joke of electronic vote rigging and wasted money on recounts. We saw how the GOP conventions were just blatant mockeries, blocking Ron Paul supporters as delegates any illegal way they could, when it was clear that Ron Paul was more popular than McCain.

I like what I've read so far about Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party, but for me the Green and Libertarian parties are DOA.

But until we get rid of the electronic voting machines and secret ballot counting, our elections will continue to be nothing more than a rigged game where the MSM media and those in power already know the winner months ahead.

So, Onward March with Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty! And may God help us and protect us in the years to come from whichever government puppet is put into power in November! Our only hope is filling Congress and Senate with people who believe in Ron Paul and his message.

I doubt if many Paul supporters jump to the Green Party. It is all about more government control of our lives. I will be voting Libertarian once again. Long live the Campaign For Liberty!!!

Let's face facts. All these millions of Americans, despite how they became involved with supporting the Ron Paul campaign, now understand some of the economic scams perpetrated upon then like the Federal Reserve and their faux fiat money swindle. Unless you are dumb as a rock, which is the case with many a reporter or media personality, you realize we are headed for economic disaster. However, this time around everybody is going to know why we are in this mess and whom the responsible parties are. Government and their shills in the media will be blamed this go around and rightfully so.

Nader is correct in one way and that is Americans need to stop thinkging that there are only two teams in the game. We should have at least 4 choices. At this point we have only 1 choice with a different name.

I will be voting for Bob Barr for sure. Time for a real changes!!!

 
1 2 | »

Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics


Categories


Archives
 



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: