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, via 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 Paul has formally withdrawn his candidacy for the G.O.P. nomination and is no longer seeking the Presidency, there is a clear choice for those who want to support a candidate who will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

[Michael Cathcart]

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.

[joe]

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 …

[Race]

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.

[Eli]

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

[Teflon Ron]

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

[Paul]

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

[Mike Parker]

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.

[P. A.]

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.

[NH]

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.

[Kenneth Clark]

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).

[Henry Miller, Cary, NC]

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.

[Matthew]

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.

[Shawn]

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.

[Jeffrey]

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.

[Brad Linzy]

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!

[Andrea Thorn]

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.

[Mr Republican]

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

[Lennon Zamora]

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.

[Hugh Henderson]

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.

[Tim Graham]

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

[omg]

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.

[Web Smith]

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

[Web Smith]

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

[Davo]

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

[Chuck]

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.

[Joe Shmoe]

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!

[neoconned08]

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.

[R]

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.

[Brad]

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.

[Chez]

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?

[Anti-Bureacracy]

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

[Robert Brager]

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.

[michael sellner]

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.

[myndi pruett]

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.

[william]

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.

[Tannim]

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!

[Carole]

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.

[Frank in Miami, FL]

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!

[sean truitt]

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. . .

[Erich]

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.

[liberty yes]

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.

[Libertarian Anarchist]

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.

[Vectorpedia (Rick)]

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

[Michael Shanklin]

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!

[Leonerdo]

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...

[Infinity]

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.

[blakmira]

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.

[Jim Liberty]

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!!!

[Tomas Estrada-Palma]

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.

[Dave in NH]

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!!!

[Dan]

(1) Nader is fooling himself; there is precious little overlap between Ron Paul's economic philosophy and Nader's statism-infused, command-and-control philosophy. And Ron Paul himself has been saying very nice things about Barr very recently.

(2) To write in Ron Paul for president truly would be wasted effort and time, because most states do not tabulate write-in votes unless a candidate has filed some minimal paperwork to be recognized as such. At least Barr, and to a lesser extent Baldwin, will be on the ballot. If you want to send a message a that will be heard -- i.e., cast a vote that will be counted -- vote for Barr (or, if you simply will not, then for Baldwin).

(3) Paul will not endorse McCain, but he probably will not explicitly, formally endorse any non-Republican, either. To explicitly endorse Barr (or anyone such as Baldwin) would be an invitation for Paul to lose his seat on the House Committee on Financial Services. Ain't gonna happen.

[A]

Are the people splitting hairs about smaller government really upset Nader won't just trash the whole government?
The government will be smaller by virtue of removing corporate lobbying, making it a one person one vote democracy, reducing the bloated military that spends more than the rest of the world already. I could rant so I won't. It just seems like people talking about Nader's "big government" are stuck seeing a big twig in a small forrest. Just because we get rid of pork barrel legislation and subsidies to ethanol and oil producers does not mean we don't need to do anything.
Nader wants to enforce the constitution. Incentives to conserve gas and switch to solar and wind actually create jobs for Americans that would just be dollars that would have mostly went oversees, while making America self-sustainable. That's not going to happen by itself fast enough for our planet or its people. It's also a matter of national security, being as self-sustainable as possible in an unstable world, which what a president should do for the people.

[Paul]

Nader is Tired not Wired!

He is also a Shill with Zero understanding of the American Economic system. He has no new Ideas! He is 20 years out of date.

In closing I say McCann and Obama are two senators that got AMERICA in this mess and they are doing their best to bury us NOW why vote for these lying fools.

Both men are LOSERS!

I am Right look at the current state of both Iowa (McCain Land) and IIllinois (Obama Land) GOD IS VERY ANGRY!

[MacIntosh]

I am a huge fan of Ron Paul and will never, never vote for Bob Barr. Bob Barr is a hypocrite and a scumbag. It wouldn't surprise me if he were a Neocon plant in the LP. Barr voted for the Iraq war AND the Patriot Act. Nader is much closer to Ron Paul on the issues of foreign policy, monetary policy, and the protection of civil liberties. Yea, he would want a lot of Federal regulation BUT only against corporations that now own congress and are responsible for turning our nation to fascism. I will either write in Ron Paul or vote for Nader.

[sunny]

forget it ralph!
stop pandering for votes for ron paul people.
you're a damn socialist and no ron paul supporter is gonna vote for you.

[Mike]

Nader loves big-goverment as long as it's following his agenda. And there's no aspect of human endeavor that he wouldn't first look to government for a solution. Next.

[A]

Sunny, you shame Ron Paul I am sure. You use the same untrue rhetoric Ron Paul denounces, acting like you speak for all Ron Paul supporters, and you seem to share little with Ron Paul's message. He wants a true Democracy, so what' wrong with seeing what Ralph Nader or anybody else is about? I am interested in Ron Paul's suggestions for Ralph Nader though, but I cannot think your rants represent the man or the majority of his supporters who are trying to further Democracy in this nation, and waking people up. They may be two different options and differ in some ways, but I can't see Ron Paul backing down on a discussion, since the two are so alike in many, many ways. Just because we need laws doesn't mean we need to be a police state. Just because some government leadership in some areas may be essential, does not equate to the "big government" mess we're in right now. The market does not do everything necessary for national interests by itself all the time.

[Nick]

I don't think Nader will get even 1% of the Paul vote. He's a big government guy....thinking government is the solution to all the problems....

Basically a polar opposite to Paul....it shows how little he understands about the movement.

[Pat]

Bob does not represent the Libertarian Party. He voted FOR the Patriot Act. FOR the War on Drugs. FOR the War in Iraq. FOR the Defense of Marriage Act.

Only a retard would think that Bob Barr represents the Libertarian Party's idealogy.

[A]

Whether Nader gets his votes or not is secondary. Other people share Ron Paul's main concern, and have for years. You'd think his supporters would be glad of that.
Nader being "big government" is hyperbole. Ron Paul is not just a "small government" guy either. He does promote the free market as the answer to most problems, but he's also trying to get people to recognize our democracy and government's in shambles, because it's in the pocket of corporations, which are facades for an elite powerful minority. They shout out any chance of democracy, dividing us with rhetoric, repeated through mainstream media (and us), and drag us to war against the informed will of the people, and against America's security. They put in their figureheads as our two "choices". They made them both so bad, some will be too scared to do anything but choose the "lesser of two evils". Do you really think these two are America's best and brightest, most moral, consistent, uncorrupted?
Nader's been fighting the same thing for years, and trying to give people have real choices come voting time, beyond two staged ones.
He seems to want you to know, that is, if you really are a Ron Paul supporter, that there others who are fighting for his same central theme, and they could use your help, at least in having a rational conversation, if not your support. Wouldn't it be good to know that others are trying to give people back their voices, instead of 1$ 1 vote, go back to 1 person 1 vote, and restore the importance of the constitution? Wouldn't it be good to know that others are trying to have a real conversation not based on rhetoric and lies, and think Bush's and Cheney's trampling of the constitution, and Congress's unwillingness to stand up for the Constitution and People should be addressed?
If you're going to nitpick because Nader feels that we need meaningful laws to restrict pollution and promote solar development, that have been suppressed by special interests, that's OK. Calling it "big government" is distractive and inaccurate though. Ron Paul seems to hate empty words as much as I do though.
We have some laws for a reason, others not so much. Would it be right if police and firefighters were free market "pay per service", only available if you have the money? Those are socialized institutions. Ron Paul's not as anti-government as you seem to portray, I think he's against elite domination of our "two party system", which Nader has been fighting for as well, for a long, long time. I shouldn't even need to tell you this. I had the respect to check Ron Paul out, listen to him, and I respect him. I'm glad Dr. Paul is waking some people up, and realized himself the trouble we're in, even though I support Nader after looking into both.

[Kyle]

To Robert Brager –

Right on. I'm glad to see there's one educated libertarian on this board. Ron Paul is not an anarchist, people. Even a libertarian government is organized COERCION, some degree of which is necessary to maintain a civil society. All you haters should read Mises and Hayek and stop getting your education from Glenn Beck and YouTube.

Nader is not a communist, etatist, socialist, etc. But unlike anyone else running for president (including, respectfully, Ron Paul) he has decades of hard-earned experience and insight into how huge corporations (yes, this includes international banking interests and Wall Street) have turned our government against us, which would dissatisfy anyone with some of the oversimplifications of Libertarian dogma.

Do yourselves a favor, and get to know more about Ralph Nader before you dismiss him.

General
http://www.nader.org
http://www.votenader.org

On the Fed:
http://www.counterpunch.org/nader02112006.html

On corporate welfare:
http://www.nader.org/index.php?/archives/93-Testimony-of-Ralph-Nader-on-Corporate-Welfare-Before-the-Committee-on-the-Budget,-U.-S.-House-of-Representatives,-June-30,-1999.html

I think Libertarians would also appreciate his book "The Big Boys," (1986) which profiles corporate executives and industries, and should show you why you should be more concerned about corporate power.

[Erich]

The concern about Nader's economics should be trumped by the opportunity for a significant protest vote against the war.

He is the strongest of the 3rd pary candidates in terms of name recognition and respect - as is evidenced here.

Splitting the protest vote 4 ways will not accomplish anything. Far better to have one candidate, who is explicitly anti-war and pro-civil liberties get their 25-30% of the vote, and perhaps an elector or two.

Face it: The anti-authoritarian Left is unlikely to support the Libertarians or the Constitution Party.

Libertarians, at least, do have a history of seeking out strategic allies at critical moments. With Ron Paul out of the race, 2008 may be one of those times.

[DanLV]

I'm writing in Ron Paul.

[Will]

There are too many important issues where Nader differs from Ron Paul for me to consider voting for him, but I'm proud to call him an ally on the issues of foreign policy and civil liberties. I hope he continues to focus on these issues and bring America closer to libertarian values.

[A]

I know there's room in the real Democracy that Nader and Dr. Paul promote for differences of opinion. Either would pave the way for Democracy now and later, just by opening up debates to more than the elite few. Can you imagine a politician that listens to people, and does more than ignore or answer what you want to hear?

I think Nader's stance on immigration is a little more thoughtful and considerate of our place in the world. I don't think privatization works for everything, take police, fire stations and some aspects of health care for example. I think Ron Paul has a point with health care. We have a system where some sick Canadians may come here to pay for for elective or faster treatments (they actually have money up there?), but they have to go back home or our system will bankrupt them, for example. I think if we take out the wasteful corporate lobbying from health care, the costs and waste will go down.
If nothing else, Ron Paul's supporters can learn from Nader's history and fight, how easy it is for the MSM to marginalize rational ideas like a democracy where you have more than two choices. Dr. Paul can be called an anarchist just like Nader can be labeled a socialist. Neither is true in any way that makes real sense. If you want any laws or government services, you can be called a socialist. If you want government out of your lives in certain places, you can be called an anarchist. It's all in how it's spun.

It worries me only slightly to hear people say they'll have to vote Party now, like Barr for example, on a simple label. Maybe they were never awake to begin with though.

[AG]

I have been a Nader supporter, though I was aware of Ron Paul's opposition to the Iraq War and the Patriot act and supported that (my hightest priorities).

I always wanted a debate between Nader, McKinney, Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, Kucinich, because real issues would finally be discussed.

I am a supporter of government rule, and that being said, I believe that there should be no exceptions for the elite. If it is not fair, change it for everyone.

Nader wants to cut the bloated military budget which just makes a select few rich while the rest are sent to die and suffer. If that form of corporate welfare was eliminated, our taxes would go down significantly.

He wants to make corporations accountable for thier actions.

I don't believe in the sanctitiy of the constitution to the degree that there can be no criticism or change of it. After all, it allowed for the indian slaughter, slavery, and most other injusticies without the ability to prevent them.

I also believe in univeral health care as being a basic human right.

I support any rule that protects basic human rights for all.

You can't have liberty without justice, and you cannot have justice if it is based on lies.

peace

[Kevin Wayne]

This whole "anti-big government" thing is all knee-jerk right-wingism IMHO.

If you really REALLY are against big government, then work to give the USA back to the Native Americans.

They type of helath care nader propses is done in Canada & Europe. I talk to people from those places all the time who are quite happy with their health care. This talk against it nothing but alarmism.

[Smack MacDougal]

The ultimate expression of shadowy corporate personhood, corporate crime and corporate welfare is the Federal Reserve private bank.

Money is a commodity as wheat, corn and oil are. Men must depend on the bounty of nature for wheat, corn and oil even with their scientific knowledge.

However, the Federal Reserve Private Corporation has a MONOPOLY on the manufacture and distribution of money.

The U.S. Congress of 1912-1913 granted the Federal Reserve Private Corporation this MONOPOLY of money manufacture and distribution.

To enforce the use of Federal Reserve Private Corporation Banknotes (open your wallet and look at a dollar bill), the U.S. Congress decreed that ONLY Federal Reserve Private Banknotes could be legal tender and thus the only money you can use to pay taxes, mortgages, car loans and credit card debt.

If Ralph Nader were serious about ending Corporate Personhood as he claims on his web site, he would call for an end to the Monopoly Money Corporation, the Federal Reserve.

[A]

One thing at a time. Maybe try supporting him or talking to him before making additional demands. Just because you think the FR is the biggest issue right now, doesn't mean we all do. We have enough problems as it is, without overthrowing our currency system, MR "If Nader were serious."

He's kind of trying to end the war, get rid of corporate control of our foreign policy, domestic politics and government in general, educate the public, stop ballot obstructionism, demand accountability for Bush and Cheney's trampling the constitution and leading us into war with lies, etc, etc, etc., all the things he's been consistantly trying to do for years. How about this. Once we save our country from the clutches of madmen who think they can just lie to us and squeeze us between fake choices, and try to re-establish a democracy in this nation, just maybe, the nation would be willing to hear your arguments for disbanding our currency system. I don't think Nader should need to agree to your demands just yet on the FR to justify how serious he is, with all his work over the years to try to protect us and give us choices, while we've ignored the steady march to destruction.

If you think the FR is the most pressing concern for our nation right now, write him and ask him to add it to his list to look at. http://www.votenader.org/

Yeesh.

[Zak Carter]

Nader and his "consumer advocacy" is the reason i have to wear a damn seat belt everytime I get in my car - and damn im tired of people and my government trying to save me from myself - no to the Nanny state - no to Nader!

[JohnFromChicago]

I respect and appreciate Mr Nader's honesty and genuineness. I also appreciate his respect for the statesman Dr Paul, and his supporters. But Nader's big government solutions just don't work. When bureaucracy failed, we added more bureaucracy. That is now failing too. The solution of adding yet more bureaucracy doesn't square with common sense. Also ...

The Fed needs to be gone. It's not an economic philosophy, it is a simple matter of obeying the law. The Constitution only authorizes Congress to COIN money, not print it, and it forbids the States from using anything but gold and silver COIN in payments. There has been NO amendment to this, thus the Federal Reserve, or any central bank is patently illegal. This would make the Fed a criminal organization by nature. A simple read of the first Article of the Constitution and the Coinage Act of 1792 show that our entire monetary system is one big fraud.

As long as we allow a small group of men to control our money supply and our economy, we will live in a never-ending state of war and increasing civil unrest. It is how they make their money.

[A]

If you have better options, maybe you guys should get your own candidate going that can represent you in time. I know Nader is still working to get on the ballots, but if you guys have the funding, you may be able to get somebody else in quicker, and get your information together so people know what you're about. More voices and more choices than the two major corporate approved options is a first step for a democracy or republic. I don't see disbanding the FR as all that helpful to America at this exact second, without addressing other things, as a few wealthy interests will still control the parties and our "representatives". Our anti corruption laws must be a joke or not enforced, for all this to be going on.

I personally am OK with stopping the war that's bleeding lives and dollars, making us less safe and eroding our professed democracy. I don't mind if some of the money we save is used on social improvements, all the things we say we care about. The free market alone is no cure for injustices, because it allowed so many.

You're right about a small group of people controlling the money supply, but that's only part of the problem. The problem is it's a small group of people controlling almost everything our government actually does in our name, and making wasteful decisions that benefit them rather than us.
Nader would open up debates so more have a chance speak their message and truly challenge each other, without depending on the two major party approval. I hope your candidate does too then, to keep us out of this type of democratic decay.

[A]

It seems like some are newborns still, just barely waking up to the fact that the system's corrupt, or controlled by a minority. That's OK. We need this perspective. Nader has known and told us this for a long, long time, and spent a lifetime practically fighting it and trying to wake the public up to the fact that we have more than 2 choices, and we're brainwashed to think that more choices hurt a democracy somehow. Ron Paul seems a man of great integrity , with the humility to admit when he realizes something new, and we all need to be more like that.
Nader has some good plans to help us turn this around, and they're based on years of knowledge and experience that I hope can finally be coupled with public awareness and reciprocal support. I know I just ignored it as background knowledge for a long time.
If you do have a better plan, I challenge you to look that this problem goes beyond the FR or even the "big government". It seems what happens when you let wealthy interests control the government undemocratically. Calling Nader "big government" sounds melodramatic, since he wants a smaller government, just run by, of and for the people better. No patriot act, no unconstitutional detainment. The words of politics are a tricky for sure though , with the "democratic" party obstructing third party choices and the "conservative party" raising the national debt. A president should be concerned with our security. The only difference is Nader is telling us by not invading other countries, it makes us more secure. Promoting conservation and weaning off of foreign oil makes us more secure. Public awareness makes us more secure. He never said the government would fix everything. He has seemed to say to me that there are things the government can do though, but as always, the rest is up to us.

[Smack MacDougal]

The design of the USA changed with the end of Popular Representation of the House (why the Census exists in the first place) and with the 17th Amendment (allowing voters and not states legislatures to vote for senators).

These two acts made it easy to buy off all 535 members of Congress (now 538), instead of having to bribe all of the legislators of the various states (for the senators) and to bribe an ever growing head count in the House (which now does not happen since the count is frozen).

Next, with a Private Corporation holding a Government Granted Charter of Monopoly to manufacture and distribute money -- the Federal Reserve -- the owners of this charter affect every transaction in America.

Every buy takes a thing sold and money offered. When you can forever change the price of money on a whim, you control how much folks can buy at the moment.

Next, with the 16th Amendment (income tax), a never-ending parade of beggars and con men go to Congress and demand welfare or subsidy, funded by money absconded from the pocket of one guy and given to another.

Ralph Nadar lacks key insight to the fundamental problems of the USA -- monopoly money, Collectvist income taxation, lack of Popular Representation.

Ralph Nader seeks power and the desire to play Secular God, shaping a way to rule over others.

The rest of us want to play Adult Games of Fun -- trading, buying, selling, shopkeeping -- based on well-known rules and a level playing board.

Until Ralph can awaken to First Things First, he will contine to be a problem meddling with Effects and not forcing a change to the Causes.

[A]

OK Smack. I live in a real world where there are certain options and consequences, certainly more than we're led to believe though. Cancelling the dollar like petulant children who can't handle a government, or a currency system, and not considering what we'd do to the world and our standing is your right to vote for.
We obviously don't understand each other's reasoning, so how about you get on the ball giving America choices then? We can't trust Barr, the Green Party's a subsidiary of the Democrats this year, we don't like the Democrat or Republican Duopoloy and minority money driven control that's leading us into war after war for their profit. Get going then.

[Say What?]

This is no longer an educated discussion. Nader has written more than some people here have ever read apparently on limiting the federal reserve, the economics of taxation and popular representation.
http://www.counterpunch.org/nader02112006.html
http://www.ontheissues.org/2004/Ralph_Nader_Tax_Reform.htm
Do you even need an article on Nader and the importance of representatives actually representing the people?

[Smack MacDougal]

You can kick and scream, whine and cry, yet dancing around Truth does not make Truth go away.

To change the Effects -- corruption, rotten power, unwarrented subsidy, corrupting and humiliating welfare, undeserved monopoly -- you must go to the Causes -- Monopoly Money, Collectvist income taxation, lack of Popular Representation.

The acts of men -- subsidy-seeking, welfare-seeking, monopoly-seeking, power-seeking -- arise as consequence to the Rules, the Causes.

Ralph Nader is the same as the Democrats and the Republicans. Ralph Nader is an Officialdom over Freedom kind of guy, a guy who seeks to rule over your lives much as Julius Ceasar or Henry the 8th.

Nader seems to be more like Nero, a guy who sees the Power of the State as all-important, while individuals only should be free to live debauched, hedonistic, private lives.

While no adult should meddle in the private desires of other adults, no man or government ought to meddle in the free exchange of products between adults as well.

Nader is another Big Government, statist meddler who appeals to Utopian Udopian dreamers.

[nader paul kucinich gravel]

Nader Paul Kucinich Gravel
McKinney Ventura
Perot charts...
RATM

Honesty compassion intelligence guts
- or more lies?

[thebest]

I Respect nader, but do not trust him nor Mckinney, because they will continue to support the evil UN, The UN does not represent us.

And bob barr is a joke too

and the two party system is pathetic as always

Vote Baldwin/Castle 08

Even though I'm libertarian.

[poweRob]

I enjoyed reading through the comments more than I did the blog. lol

For all the Ron Paul supporters that seem to go off on Nader, let me explain what he is doing here. He is doing a classic politically polite maneuver. He sees a grassroots campaign that folded its tent and with full respect, appealed to the constituents who may now be looking for another candidate to support. Then offered similarities between his campaign and Ron's.

I don't by any stretch of the imagination think he intends to land all Ron Paul supporters. What I'm saying is, me thinks he's offered far more respect to you than some of you are offering to him. Don't you think maybe you should show some of the same respect to Nader that he showed you by actually paying attention enough to respectfully court your vote?

Not that I'm omnipotent and have read everything but... I don't recall any psuedo conservative candidates lining up and affording you that level of respect to earn your vote.

I thought Nader's move was rather classy.

[Parker]

Ralph Nader is on the ballot in 45 states. The states that he is not on the ballot all have anti-democratic laws on nomination signatures. He is fighting to gain access in those 5 states as well.

As far as the "evil big government" argument, this assumes that government is inherently bad. It doesn't have to be. The problem is that we continue to elect corporate controlled clowns into office. They always promise that smaller government is the answer. What they are really doing is handing over governmental authority to private corporations who rip off American citizens. If small government means more corporate power, count me out.

It is not "big government" that is the problem, but the persons running the "big government." If the Ralph Nader's of the world were running the "big government," it would not be such a loathsome entity. Instead it would be working for the people, not against them.

[Maureen]

Just a comment to PA and Mike Parker...Nader IS on the ballot in 45 states already, and he is supporting "single payer health insurance" which is not "government-run health care". It is similar to Medicare, in which you have free choice of doctor and hospital. 59% of physicians support single payer, and so do a majority of Americans.

[Harold]

WHAT IF RALPH NADER ANNOUNCED HIS INTENTION TO APPOINT RON PAUL AS HIS TREASURY SECRATERY? A POSITION THAT DR PAUL IS WELL QUALIFIED FOR. DOCTOR, SMALL BUSINESS MAN, STUDIED AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS. WANTS TO TAKE US TO A SOUND CURRENCY SYSTEM. THINK ABOUT IT AND SEE IF IT FLIES. ONE BATTLE AT A TIMEWINS WARS. ALL OR NOTHING IS A FOOLS AGENDA.

[nader PAUL mckinney]

Sunday Bloody Sunday
The Wall Street Shuffle

ralph DR RON cynthia

What have they done to the earth?
What have they done to our fair sister?
Ravaged & plundered & ripped her & bit her
Stuck her with knives in the side of the dawn
& tied her with fences &
Dragged her down!

mike dennis jesse ross