Posts Tagged ‘ralph nader’

Obama’s Vague Promises = Inevitable Leftist Dismay

December 20, 2008

The deepening disenchantment on the far Left with Barack Obama has sparked a campaign here in New England to track Mr. Obama’s appointments and moves as he prepares to take office. Folks at The Phoenix group of alternative newspapers (Boston,Providence, Portland) have started a site named Take Back Barack.

Jeff Inglis, a commentator at the site, writes yesterday (excerpts,emphasis added):

….I’ve come to a deeper understanding of this visceral feeling I have of worry about Obama….

….Only time will tell whether Obama will do the right things, the things we voted for him to do – withdraw from Iraq, improve our education system, fix healthcare, green the economy. Many liberals and progressives are counseling us to wait and see, to give Obama a chance to make change.

That is the wrong path. We cannot sit back on whatever laurels we may have heard by electing Obama and let him do what he and his advisors want. We must remain constantly involved, a constant force to push Obama, his advisors, and Congress to do what we know needs to be done.

He might just do the right things, even if we left him alone. But we can’t take that chance – especially with the advisors he has chosen. Maybe he can take the Clinton out of Hillary and the McCain out of Jim Jones. Maybe they will come around – or even already have – to share Obama’s views on many topics. But I’m not willing to bet my future, my country’s future on that….Obama called on us to stand up and take our country back. We need to do that – and we start by Taking Back Barack.

Ralph Nader is not happy either. On Democracy Now (Dec 5) here is Nader in an exchange with Amy Goodman (excerpts):

…after appointing all the heavyweights, keeping Gates as Secretary of Defense, Hillary Clinton at State Department, and other positions—Treasury, for example, coming from Wall Street—the article said, well, it’s time now to consider some liberal appointees….Well, what’s left?….As long as liberals and progressives gave Obama a pass during the election and didn’t demand anything in return, he knew that he had their votes and he had their support regardless and moved right, moved to the corporate. And that’s reflected in the appointments that he has been putting in place….Now we look forward to the second level. Who’s going to be Food and Drug Administration head? Who’s going to be the head of the Auto Safety Agency or EPA? Will so-called liberals and progressives get their share of the Obama administration at that second level? It remains to be seen. But the signs are not very auspicious.

….(Obama) defeated Hillary Clinton in a close race, and now he’s reinstalling the Bill Clinton administration. Now, there are two interpretations, briefly, here. One, it could reflect his insecurity. That way, by putting Clintonites all over the government and keeping Gates, he is basically eliminating a lot of potential centers of criticism and challenge to his administration after January 20….

Amy Goodman asks about the Marine General Jim Jones nomination as National Security Adviser:

Jim Jones is basically the representative of what President Eisenhower cautioned us about, the military-industrial complex. He is experienced. He’s clever. And now he’s in the White House. So the question is, who’s going to run what? Is Obama going to transform Jim Jones? Is Obama going to transform all these establishment appointees? Or are they going to, in effect, transform him, in contrast to his more liberal rhetoric?

Code Pink activist Medea Benjamin is with Nader in this discussion and she has much to say about Iraq and Afghanistan; we’ll leave that for a later post. Stay tuned.

h/t Brian Maloney: Radio Equalizer

Obama Dismays the Left

Advertisements

Nader: Obama Trying to “Talk White”

June 26, 2008

“There’s only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He’s half African-American,” Nader said. “Whether that will make any difference, I don’t know. I haven’t heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What’s keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn’t want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We’ll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards.”

Obviously Nader is referring to the Obama campaign strategy and not BHO’s manner of speaking which is in the best tradition of English locution and oratory.

See Booker Rising (black perspective) blog for additional responses to Nader’s foolishness:

…in Mr. Nader’s mind black = poor. Never mind that 74% of black Americans are not poor…and most black Americans haven’t been poor since the 1960s. Perhaps Mr. Nader hasn’t heard Sen. Obama talk about these issues, because Sen. Obama is aware of the social class diversity and progress in Black America. Last night, I was discussing this very topic with a black liberal guy from Denver who was visiting Chicago. Although we are ideologically different, we both agreed that Mr. Nader was out of order on this one.

See Hot Air (white perspective) where Ed Morrissey berates Nader:

Talk white”? Do people still think this way? Apparently Nader does, and the arrogance here is simply stunning. On what basis does Ralph Nader think that he qualifies to be the arbiter of black authenticity? Nader doesn’t even bother to go for subtlety or code words here. He doesn’t actually utter the words “Uncle Tom” in this outburst, but the meaning is plain. Nader accuses Obama of selling out the poor and his own constituency in order to ingratiate himself with the “white

Obama Unconcerned About Nader Bid….

February 24, 2008

Perennial spoiler Ralph Nader has announced he intends to enter this year’s presidential contest according to the Associated Press. Nader is scheduled on the “meet the Press” program this morning. According to The Wall Street Journal:

Barack Obama said today during a visit at the Ohio State University Medical Center that he wasn’t terribly concerned about the prospect of a Nader campaign. “I think the job of the Democratic Party is to be so compelling that a few percentage [points] of the vote going to another candidate is not going to make any difference.”

It was, however, those few percentage points of the vote which gave “W” his margin of victory in Florida in 2004. Nader is hated by many Democrats for that reason and is bound to incur their wrath this time around as well. It wasn’t all that long ago when another spoiler named Ross Perot had handed the victory to Bill Clinton in 1992. In that race Perot received 18.9% of the vote compared to Clinton’s 43%.The indefatigable Nader will be 74 in a few days.

The Green Party folks have a draft Nader movement in place and have been especially excited by a Nader candidacy since John Edwards left the race in January.

This has got to auger well for the Republicans.