Here's why Ralph refuses to quit

Will we ever wake up?

Here is the complete 12/1/04 email message from Ralph Nader to his supporters:

Dear Friends,

People say to me - Ralph, why don't you just go back to doing what you used to do - just be a consumer advocate? You were so good at it. Politics is too sleazy for you.

Good question.

When I first hitchhiked to Washington, DC more than forty years ago, my goal was to impose a measure of law and order on the automobile industry.

Too many of my friends had been injured or killed in automobile collisions.

And being a regular hitchhiker, I was often first on the scene of grisly automobile accidents.

I witnessed the carnage first hand.

At the time, the automobile industry was placing blame for a steady increase in death and injury on the highway on the "nut behind the wheel" -- not the designed-in dangers of the automobile itself -- like rigid steering wheel assemblies that would crush the driver to death.

At Harvard Law School, I started researching automobile safety and learned what safety engineers inside the auto industry knew -- seat belts, air bags, collapsible steering wheels, padded dashboards, stronger door latches -- had all been invented or perfected by the automobile industry itself.

But the industry bosses kept these life-saving devices on the shelf and were refusing to free their engineers to implement them.

So, I wrote a book, Unsafe at Any Speed, whose first chapter focused on one unsafe creature -- the Corvair.

The broader point was not missed by General Motors -- I was on an industry-wide crusade to make automobiles less deadly.

But instead of seeing this as an opportunity to win friends -- automobile passengers wanted safety too -- GM saw Unsafe at Any Speed as a threat to its bottom line.

And so they hired a private investigator to dig up dirt on me.

One day, while I was on Capitol Hill, a security guard noticed that someone was following me.

One thing led to another, and eventually, the President of General Motors had to appear before a Senate hearing where he apologized to me before a massive media turnout.

The nation's largest corporation was apologizing on network television for hiring a private detective to follow me and harass me.

I sued GM for invasion of privacy, and GM settled the case.

I used the payment GM made to settle the case to seed a number of consumer groups in Washington, DC.

These groups went on to work the system -- and improve the lives of millions of Americans by passing into law landmark environmental, consumer protection, and worker safety legislation.

Unsafe at Any Speed became a nationwide bestseller.

The publicity generated by the GM spy scandal led to the passage of the federal auto safety and highway laws, which imposed safety standards on the industry.

As a result, over a million lives were saved and many more injuries were prevented.

Such laws regulating the auto industry could not be passed today.

Big corporations have both political parties under their collective thumb.

Washington, DC is corporate occupied territory.

We cannot continue to delude ourselves into believing that the Democrats will be able to break this stranglehold.

In 2004, a handful of well-meaning wealthy individuals spent $100 million on private efforts to defeat President Bush.

They failed because they resisted this simple truth -- the frozen Democrats are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

It's time that we move on and create a nationwide grassroots effort to overturn the two-party corporate duopoly.

In 1966, the Corvair was Unsafe at Any Speed.

Today, it's the two party duopoly that is Unsafe at Any Speed and that is leading us over the brink.

That's why there can be no more business as usual inside the Beltway.

It is incumbent upon us to develop new and more creative strategies to upend the two-party corporate duopoly.

In 2004, liberal Democrats abandoned our progressive agenda in droves.

But during our 2004 campaign through all 50 states, we met active citizens, young and old alike, who are with us now in this energetic effort to free our democracy from the grip of corporate rule.

Like General Motors in 1966, the Democratic Party in 2004 launched a dirty tricks effort -- this time against the Nader/Camejo campaign, driving us into debt.

We have to make up our shortfall by the end of the year -- about $450,000 for both debts and winding down the campaign.

Because you have been such a loyal supporter of our campaign, I'd like to make you a special holiday offer that will help us retire this debt.

We are making available to you a limited number of vintage 1972 paperback editions of Unsafe at Any Speed with my updated introduction. http://www.votenader.org/contribute/index.php?cid=45

For a donation of $100 or more to our campaign, I will autograph for you this historic copy of Unsafe at Any Speed - the book that launched the modern consumer movement - and send it to you in time for the holidays.
http://www.votenader.org/contribute/index.php?cid=45

This will make a lasting gift for your friends and family during the holidays.

So, please consider buying more than one. (And let your friends and family know about this offer by forwarding this letter to your address book.)

We are looking for 5,000 donors to help us wrap up this campaign on a happy fiscal note.

Please go to our contribute page (http://www.votenader.org/contribute/index.php) and give as generously as you can.

If you want to give $100 or more and receive a signed copy Unsafe at Any Speed, click here: http://www.votenader.org/contribute/index.php?cid=45

Thank you for your ongoing generosity and bright horizons,

Ralph Nader

Just Wondering...

...exactly how far this country has its collective head shoved up its collective ass.

We just "re"elected a president who preached freedom of speech and expression from the podium at his rallies, while people in the audience who chose to exercise that freedom by wearing anti-Bush shirts or displaying anti-Bush stickers (while simply sitting there doing or saying nothing) were physically escorted from the premises, sometimes in handcuffs. At other rallies, people were forced to sign a pledge to support Bush before they were permitted to enter. How was a non-righty who at least had an open enough mind to hear him out supposed to be able to do so when being forced to swear allegiance before the fact?

We just "re"elected a president who, in the days immediately following 9/11, said he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive" and then six months later said he really didn't think about him that much, that he wasn't concerned about him.

SEE THE VIDEO PROOF HERE.
We just "re"elected a president who had the entire world by his side after 9/11, supporting our effort in Afghanistan, who then stupifyingly removed urgently needed resources from the REAL war on terror to invade a country and remove a leader that posed no imminent threat to us whatsoever. It has been well established and documented that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, had no relationship with Al Qaeda, no nuclear weapons, no chemical or biological weapons, and no plans to establish programs in these areas. Although advised by his own intelligence people that it was not necessary, he committed us to Iraq anyway, without an exit strategy, piling lies on top of lies the entire time to get us to fall for it. And he sent our troops into that hell woefully unprepared and unprotected. Millions saw for themselves, on 60 Minutes last week, how troops were "armoring" their Humvees with plywood and sand bags. So while he's lying there bleeding out, taking his last breaths after an RPG attack or roadside bomb, the valiant soldier has sand poured into his wounds. Isn't that wonderful?

We just "re"elected a president whose personal war of choice WILL become a 21st century Vietnam, where thousands of our troops and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis will die in vain, because perpetual war is the lifeblood of Bush's corrupt, self-serving style of government.

We just "re"elected a president who, while basking in the carefully manufactured glory of removing an evil dictator and bringing "freedom" to an oppressed people, conveniently ignores the fact that Osama bin Laden (the guy responsible for 3000 deaths on 9/11, remember?) is still at large, as we were so starkly reminded four days before the election.

We just "re"elected a president who brought us from a record surplus to a record deficit in record time, by needlessly and illegally taking us to war and then offering up big tax breaks at the same time (the first ever wartime tax break). He has also presided over three consecutive years of increased poverty, a net loss of over 1 million jobs during his term (first president with a net loss of jobs), and has earned himself the title of worst environmental president ever.

The only possible answer to the question of how this country could vote to give this "president" another four years, even in the face of his overwhelming ineptitude, is that we are truly a nation of fools.

OR ARE WE?
Perhaps not.
We have a choice, folks. We can investigate with an open mind, ask questions and demand direct answers of those who are sustained by our tax dollars (and therefore employed by us), or we can roll over like good little sheep and let a disgusting lust for political power and influence consume our great nation.

Regardless of what you think of him, you would have to agree that Ralph Nader made an excellent observation earlier this year when he likened politics and government to your personal health and well being. If you ignore either one long enough, the chances are very good that you will eventually have a problem from which you cannot recover.

Of course, if you're tired of the fight and you simply cannot fathom the disastrous effects of another term for the most incompetent, arrogant, pompous, secretive, divisive, UNcompassionate administration to ever "grace" the White House,
HERE'S A SUGGESTION FOR YOU.

RNC attempting to censor Rock The Vote

The Bush Administration has proven itself quite adept at painting his opponent as an indecisive flip-flopper. These evil spinmasters actually want you to believe that Dubya is a steadfast, resolute, intelligent(?) leader who has never changed his mind about anything. Unfortunately for these idiots, indisputable facts prove otherwise.

In the 2000 campaign he argued against nation building:
"I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say, 'This is the way it's got to be.'"

Of course, now we're in the midst of a nation building project in Iraq, the scale of which we have not seen since the end of World War II. Of course, his supporters will say that he could not have forseen the need to enter Iraq before 9/11. But it has been made quite clear to the entire world time and time again that Saddam posed no threat to us, had nothing to with 9/11, and had no relationship with Al Qaeda. It has also been made quite clear and been well documented that Bush knew the realities before entering Iraq, and ignored strong evidence and advice from his own intelligence people that waging war on Iraq was not necessary. He chose to go anyway.

On May 29th, 2003, he claimed on Polish television that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq. Then on September 9th, 2004 in Pennsylvania, he said “I recognize we didn't find the stockpiles [of weapons] we all thought were there.”

He opposed the creation of the Homeland Security Department, then changed his mind and supported the largest expansion of the federal government since the Defense Department was created in 1949.

He opposed the creation of the independent commission to investigate the 9/11 attacks, then changed his mind and supported it, but only after enormous pressure from victims' families.

During the 2000 campaign, he blamed the Clinton Administration for the steadily rising cost of gasoline, insisting that Clinton "must jawbone OPEC members to lower prices." Well, now we're at about $55 per barrel and Dubya the oil boy is silent on the issue.

During the 2000 campaign he said that same sex marriage was an issue that should be left up to the states, then as president proposed a Constitutional amendment banning it.

In August of this year, he appeared on the Today Show and speaking of the war on terror, he said: "I don't think you can win it...I think you can create conditions so that . . . those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world", then later said: "we are winning, and we will win."

Think there might be a pattern here?

Is it any wonder, then, that millions of American kids of draft age were skeptical after Bush insisted during the St. Louis debate that there would be no military draft during a (God forbid) second term for the Bush Administration?

Rock The Vote has used this very real possibility in their effort to motivate young people and drive them to the polls on election day. But the Republican National Committee is trying to intimidate RTV into keeping quiet on the issue, even going as far as a thinly veiled threat to the group's non-profit status.

Here is the letter from RNC Chariman Ed Gillespie to Jehmu Greene, president of Rock the Vote.

Here is Greene's response.

This country needs more people like Jehmu Greene, and more groups like Rock The Vote, to help us remind the ignorant fools in Washington that they work for us, and that what WE say goes.

Right on RTV!

How Much Evidence Do We Need Folks?!

The man MUST go.

INDISPUTABLE VIDEO PROOF OF BUSH'S BIGGEST LIE

CIA WITHOLDING 9/11 REPORT UNTIL AFTER ELECTION

RECKLESS COWBOY PRESIDENT HAS MADE US LESS SAFE.

BUSH'S TOP TEN FLIP-FLOPS

100 MISTAKES FOR BUSH TO CHOOSE FROM

100 FACTS AND 1 OPINION

BUSH IN DENIAL ABOUT WMD

BUSH'S SHIFTING RATIONALE FOR IRAQ

THE QUAGMIRE, A TO Z

WITHOUT A DOUBT

Bush the Classic Abuser

On September 9th, 2001, George W. Bush's approval rating stood at 55%. Three days later, after the worst terrorist attack in our history, it was 86%. Did he really get that much better in three days?

Uh, no.

The phenomenon is called trauma bonding.

READ ALL ABOUT IT HERE.
Discover how the guy currently masquerading as our president, the supposed leader of the most powerful nation on Earth, the "uniter-not-divider", the "compassionate conservative", exhibits the same mentatilty and behavior of the classic habitual abuser.

Anyone who votes for this man is a victim in denial.

Republicrats Unite!

They’re called debates, but in reality they’re more like bipartisan press conferences, designed to thwart real democracy by shutting out third party and independent voices. The two major parties conspire to determine the subject matter, the number of debates, and the actual questions that audience members will be permitted to ask in the one debate that features a “town hall meeting” format. If an audience member asks a question that was not approved beforehand, they will be cut off and ignored. And there are no followup questions allowed. As soon as the pre-determined question is asked, the audience microphone will be turned off, so the candidate can comfortably launch into his canned stump speech response.

The Commission on Presidential Debates, the supposed neutral arbiter of these completely scripted shams, was founded by (surprise!) the two major parties, and has been co-chaired by former DNC and RNC chairmen since its inception in 1987. Nine of eleven CPD directors are prominent Democrats and Republicans. There is no third party representation among the CPD directors.

And this is supposed to be a neutral organization? Please.

The strictly limited debate format intentionally deprives us of the opportunity to make a truly informed, heartfelt decision about who should run our country. It’s nothing more than a bipartisan scam designed by politicians who are more concerned with serving their own lust for power than the citizens whose tax dollars sustain them.

Because of our spineless, complicit, corporate controlled, pathetically lazy media, most Americans don’t know that there will be a total of six candidates in this election (including Bush and Kerry) with a mathematical chance to win the presidency, by virtue of being on enough state ballots to garner the necessary 270 electoral votes. At the very least, all viable candidates should be included in the debates.

And America agrees. The latest Zogby poll reveals that 57% say at least Ralph Nader should be there.

Don’t give me any crap about third parties and independents not being included in debates because they don’t have a chance to win. This is an over-simplified, uninformed, canned response, pushed by blind democrat and republican loyalists who are actually afraid of real competition and true democracy.

It’s not just about winning, folks. It’s about bringing attention to ALL the issues that matter to Americans, as opposed to one or two that dominate the presidential election landscape every four years. Indeed, third parties that never won elections are responsible for forcing some of the most important issues in our nation’s history: The abolition of slavery, woman’s right to vote, and the right of workers to form trade unions, just for starters.

If today’s two major parties are so sure of themselves, why are they unwilling to debate the issues on a national stage with the other viable candidates? Are they afraid of the tough questions? Are they afraid of the unvarnished truth? Are they afraid the voting public will finally wake up and put and end to their duplicitous stranglehold on American government?

If you’ve had your fill of rose colored rhetoric and empty promises,
VISIT VOTENADER.ORG to learn about a real choice.

And remember that the only truly wasted vote is one made to maintain an obviously corrupt status quo.

The "Anybody But Bush" challenge

Bush says we'll "stay the course" in Iraq. Kerry says he'll TRY to have all our troops home by the end of his first term. Of course, this is a presidential campaign, and we all know what can happen to those campaign promises.

However you twist it, the bottom line is that they are both PRO-Iraq war candidates.

They are also both PRO-"No Child Left Behind", which is little more than 750 pages of unfunded mandates without a real plan for improving education in this country.

And here's the big one - the one that most folks seem to be saying is the reason that they will NOT vote for Bush:

The Patriot Act and its ongoing erosion of our civil liberties. Bush trumpets the prospect of spreading freedom around the globe at every opportunity, but has no problem restricting our own. "Oxymoron" is certainly appropriate here, and in more than one sense.

But guess who also supports the Patriot Act?

You got it. John F. Kerry.

Are these guys really all that different?

I mean besides Kerry's obvious ability to put at least two consecutive sentences together to form a coherent thought, while this prospect has Dubya looking like the deer that's thinking "gee, I hope that trucker hits the brakes in time, because I'm just too stupid to move".

While talk of Swift Boats and the Air National Guard dominate the election landscape, the issues that really matter are receivng short shrift, if any attention at all.

We need to wake up folks.

TAKE THE CHALLENGE