Nader seeks spot on R.I. ballot

Ralph who?

Go away Nader, you are a uselsess pimple on the ass of America. You have not been relevant for decades.

Ralph Nader has as much right to run for president as any other candidate and has had consumers' backs for decades. This man's tireless efforts in the face of big money and big business have earned my respect.

Seems some democrats might not want this to happen. Shame we have only 2 parties to choose from.

in theory a good idea for many candidates to run ---

in reality he is handing the White House to the autocratic Republicans - AGAIN!

Obama is trying to "talk white", what a racist jerk Nader is (I'd use a stronger adjective, but this is a family paper).

Nader in '08!

come on Bob Barr!

Heh, looks like my previous comment taking Boston Globe to task for continuing to write about Nader in negative terms (always slipping in a word like 'spoiler' or 'some Democrats think he cost Gore the elections') instead of positive terms (seat belts, warnings on pharmacy drugs, Freedom of Information Act, Clean Air Act, payment by airlines for bumping you etc.) was considered unfit to publish for reasons unknown. So much for freedom of expression.

Nader's comment on Obama trying to "talk white" and to appeal to "white guilt" is accurate. By the way, Obama's criticism of black fatherhood is founded on white American culture. That's why Jesse Jackson is furious.

My comments on this blog and on the NYT (owned by the same company), which highlight the Democrats' efforts to win elections by forcing competing candidates off the ballot, are also routinely censored. Is this the editorial policy of the NYT Company? It would be in keeping with the Times' refusal to provide reasonable coverage of Nader's past and present campaigns.

Why do we accept only two "major" parties to "lead" us? We pay
more in taxes to offset corporate welfare, a bloated defense -per
retired military officers. We pay the salaries of people from corporations
leading government agencies. How is that working out for "We the people?" We allow these two parties to be controlled by corportations. Thus millions without health care (or subsidised or costly or not enough coverage), a levee which
should have been fixed, 935+ lies leading us to war, zero impeachment mandated by "our" constitution, global warming, absurd acceptance of nafta and the wto, media monopoly, campaign contributions so we can live of, by and for those with the means to influence. Legislation "for the people" does not even making
it out of committee while legislation for those with the means to influence passes. Supreme court justices selected based almost exclusively on Roe v. Wade.
Compare to Mr. Nader's accomplishments, BEFORE the takeover.
The media promotes distortion, while not providing truth (and time) in reporting about the above issues. Mr. Nader's record screams of, by and for the people. Like our founding fathers intended and many gave their lives fighting for.
"News" entertainers and political operatives use of spin, costly negative sound bites and labels to blur the truth, do not change what is real.
Corporate media obviously do not want Mr. Nader on what use to be the 'publics' airwaves. We have the two party controlled Presidential debate fiasco keeping opposing voices from being heard. Democracy? It allowed Gore to make a deal with the soon to be appointed "marinated in oil" duo, to keep Mr. Nader out of the debates in 2000. The next time the democrats went on a suing binge, even after Mr. Nader followed the rules that only apply to candidates not selected by the two "major" parties. And who passed these laws? Democrats still use Mr. Nader as a scapegoat even though more of them voted for bush/cheney in Florida in 2000 than the number of people who voted for Mr. Nader.!? Even though Gore lost his home state of Tenn. he still got more votes than the other guy who was appointed by "our" "supreme" court. So who is to blame? How about hanging chads, keeping potential voters from voting, Jeb and Ms. Harris? Democrats can't handle this truth.
These two "major" parties have forgotten the words "We the people..." I thought the question should be "Why have we allowed this? But to see so many putting their hopes in someone who will give more of the same (because some of the promises appear somehow to be more believable?) the question is why are so many taken by this false hope? To see comments like the first two shows how the corporate media has replaced objective observation in the minds of its audience, to the detriment of "our" country.

He knows fully well that he will not win. I think it's disgraceful the way he chastises everyone around him. I'd personally rather have a president that 'talks white' than one who 'talks rascist'

Ralph Nader made a mistake by selecting an Hispanic as his running mate in my opinion. We have many issues with illegals immigration and that may turn away possible voters. I think he would make a good President, but he may nlose his ability to fight for the people.

I was denied the right to vote today (in Ga), since I had to chose between a Republican or Democratic ballot for a local election. I am neither, I vote based on the issues at hand and the person running, not based on party. Unfortunately, there were candidates and issues on both ballots that I wanted to vote for.

I believe that the so-called Two Party system is as corrupt as it can be, I believe that each candidate has a part to play and they play their parts well.

I will not fill this box up with a ton of links and copy and pastes but I will say that we can at least take one stand against this Duopoly of control and the plans that they have to make this country a dictatorship by standing together as the people and demand that the people in power be taken out, wash the slate clean and start all over. Realistically our right to even demand reform is gone. All of our rights are basically taken from us, they give us things to choose from but that is an illusion because they have already fixed the game by choosing our choices for us! They have kept Third Party candidates from being included in the debates, they exclude them from the media. The 2 Parties(Democrats and Republicans) Are instantly on the ballots of all the States in America but the third parties have to depend on the support of the people to raise signatures and a ton of money in each state just to get on the ballot of each individual state, they have to do all this without receiving funding from corporations because that is one of the things they are trying to stop the Parties from being able to do.

The 2 Party Candidates get to have media coverage on all mainstream television news programs and newspapers 24/ 7 without paying a dime. This equals to millions and millions of dollars worth of free publicity all the while steps have been taken to try and completely black out the Third party candidates. from any good exposure in the media. They lie on the 3rd Party candidates and try to make them look foolish and non-essential then they will pick one of these candidates and make up some ridiculous lie to feed the pissed of people in order to give them a scapegoat to turn their anger on because in fact the winner has already been chosen and they knew it was not going to be the people's choice.

Where is our Democracy ? When did The Constitution get thrown away?
I am saddened , disheartened and ashamed of our so-called leaders.

Seems like they read the 10 step book,” How To Fleece and Control The Masses" Worst part of this is that it is working. Most Americans just go along with the program without protest these days.

Please do me a favor. Got to the YouTube video titled,” No Democracy For America."

This video and the sidebar information will be very telling about who really pays for and makes the rules for the Presidential Debates.

We are already living under a Fascist Regime but they have done this to us so gradually and manipulatively that most people have not even noticed.

Thank you for allowing me to rant.

-Melissa

Below is just one copy and paste that tells who is really in control of the debates , it is very telling and very scary to see this one small instance on how the Government is controlling all that we see and hear (Twilight Zone Music Here)...

Presidential Debates
Right now, they are limited to the candidates from the two corporate parties.
-Melissa

Below is just one copy and paste that tells who is really in control of the debates , it is very telling and very scary to see this one small instance on how the Government is controlling all that we see and hear (Twilight Zone Music Here)...

Presidential Debates
Right now, they are limited to the candidates from the two corporate parties.

The debates are controlled by the so-called Commission on Presidential Debates, a private corporation which was created by the Democratic and Republican Parties in 1987.

The Commission is headed by Frank Fahrenkopf -- the former head of the Republican National Committee, and Paul Kirk -- the former head of Democratic National Committee.

Fahrenkopf is a lobbyist for gambling interests, Kirk for pharmaceutical companies.
Debate sponsors have included Anheuser-Busch, Phillip Morris, Ford Motor Co., Yahoo Inc., 3Com, among other companies who gave soft money to the two parties' national committees.

In 2000, some in the press dubbed the debates as the "Anheuser-Bush-Gore" debates.

In a memo by the CPD, the avowed goal for forming the commission was to "strengthen the two parties."

In 1988, the Commission seized control of the debates from the League of Women Voters.

The League had a history of allowing third party candidates to participate in the debates. In 1980 the League invited Congressman John Anderson to join Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan in the debates.

Anderson was given a boost from the public debates. At one point the polls had him at 21%. He won 7% of the vote.

When Jesse Ventura ran for Governor in Minnesota he was polling at 10 percent in the polls before the debates. After ten statewide debates he rose to 38 percent and won a 3-way race.

The Commission on Presidential Debates took a different tack from the League of Women Voters.

This Commission/corporation has excluded Ross Perot, Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan from the debates.

In 1996 Ross Perot was excluded from the debates. Even with all his money and after having won nearly 19 percent of the vote in 1992 it was determined that he did not have "a chance to win," despite the fact that he even led in the polls at one point in 1992.

Walter Cronkite called the presidential debates under the CPD an "unconscionable fraud" because the CPD an "unconscionable fraud" because the CPD format "defies meaningful discourse."

In early years the CPD determined who could be in a debate by vague criteria including interviews with columnists, pollsters and consultants who determined whether a candidate could win.

In the year 2000, the CPD changed their criteria for third party and independent candidates -- a candidate now needed 15 percent or more support as measured by the average of five private polling organizations -- which just happen to be owned by several major newspaper and television conglomerates.

In 2000, Ralph Nader was excluded from the debates because the parent corporations that conduct these polls were giving him scant attention.

Without the mainstream media attention there is no moving up, and without moving up, candidates like Nader do not get into the debates and reach tens of millions of people.

In 2000, a Fox poll revealed that 64% of likely voters wanted to see 'other candidates' including Ralph Nader in the debates.

Other polls in 2004 showed similar results.

But it didn't happen, thanks to the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Independents voices and third party candidates, including the Abolitionist, Women's Suffrage Movement, Worker Protection, and Farmer Populace Party, have brought about many of the major changes in this country.

When Abraham Lincoln ran for office, the two major parties were the Whigs and the Democrats.

As a Republican, Lincoln was elected as a third party candidate -- even after being left off the ballot in the 11 states that seceded from the Union.

In 2004, 17 national civic leaders from the left, center and right of political spectrum - including Paul Weyrich, Chellie Pingree of Common Cause, Alan Keyes, Tom Gerety of the Brennan Center for Justice, Bay Buchanan, Randall Robinson, former FEC General Counsel Larry Noble, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and Jehmu Green of Rock the Vote - created the Citizens' Debate Commission.

Bolstered by an advisory board comprised of 60 diverse civic groups, the Citizens' Debate Commission goal is to sponsor presidential debates that serves the American people, not political parties, first.

References:
Open Debates
No Debate by George Farah

You go Nader!

look naders a great guy! he has the right to take part in this! this is America isnt it?