Contact Us Advertising Information Online exclusives Cover Story Buzz Feature In Case You Missed It Vote 2009 Boulderganic Fall 2009 Student Guide 2009 Boulder Weekly Sweet 16 Anniversary Boulderganic 2009 Summer Scene 2009 Email Newsletter Legal Services Best of Boulder 2009 Annual Manual 2009 Newspaper of the Future Kids Camp Guide 2009 Wedding Marketplace 09 Jobs available Student Guide 2008 Best of Boulder 2008 Annual Manual 2008 Join Our Mailing List
|
September 4-10, 2008
editorial@boulderweekly.com
Back to Letters
Blame it on Nader
by Ben Corbett
There should be an award for Sacred Cow Defilers, and first prize should go to Ralph Nader, currently running on the Independent ticket. Despite the fact that it was all his fault that Gore lost the 2000 election (yes, it was you, Ralph, who caused this mess that we’re in today), you gotta love the guy for his obtrusive pandering to that fifth percentile disenfranchised from the myopic herd of American voters. Last Wednesday during the Democratic National Convention, the backslappers converged at the Pepsi Center to witness Bill Clinton’s “See, now wasn’t I a great president after all?” keynote address. It was sort of like a long, drawn-out shift change, a rotation of the guard with the Clintons handing the keys to the Obamas with all the associated tear-jerking pomp and ceremony. Meanwhile, Nader was tearing it up across town at University of Denver, along with activist Cindy Sheehan, actor Sean Penn, Jello Biafra of the Dead Kennedys, and Rage Against the Machine guitarist Tom Morello. Representing all third-party tickets in the presidential race — including the Greens and Libertarians — the Nader Super Rally was an in-your-face pooh-pooh of the entire convention with radical overtones that made even Hugo Chavez seem like a bush-league ranter. The best part about the rally, however, was the almost complete absence of security. Not one frisking at the door, not one metal detector, not one visible Secret Service agent present, making a complete mockery of the DNC that looked like a prison compound with its $50-million federal budget for security overkill. At the event, aside from the usual anti-war, anti-corporate tirade bordering socialist dogma, the main complaint was levied against the major parties for denying third-party participation in presidential debates without the necessary 15 percent of the popular vote. “Why won’t Obama agree to a debate?” Nader asked, implying: What’s he afraid of?
A better question might be: “Why should Obama agree to a debate?” But Nader was singing to the choir, because the majority of those who attended the rally were already huge fans, there to get their spoonful of self-righteous euphoria, or with any luck, an autograph from one of the stars (one guy was even standing around the photo pit with a song list he snaked from Wednesday’s surprise Rage Against the Machine concert in one hand and a pen in the other). There’s a certain victim complex that stirs through the Nader crowd, almost a self-inflicted underdogism that works in lieu of a proper identity, and those who flock under the third-party banners are the ones who have been maimed by the system, whether in truth or fantasy.
About a decade ago, I worked for a magazine that, out of principle, refused to run cigarette ads, even though the tobacco advertisers were practically smashing down the door, ready to throw shovelfuls of money at the publisher. Eventually, the publication, as often happens, folded. One of the best new magazines out there, it was a real shame to see it go. Last week I was e-mailing with a magazine editor of mine who covered the Nader campaign back in 2004. She explained how she was tired of hearing Nader whimpering, mentioning something about, “Someday he’s going to have to get with the program.” Meaning, if he ever wants to get into the debates, he’s going to have to quit bad-mouthing the corporations so he can get the contributions needed to run a proper campaign and compete on a level playing field.
While you have to respect Nader for being so high-brow principled, at the same time one must question the logic. The system is the way it is, and the only way it will change is if the Commission on Presidential Debates alters the rules — allowing third parties with less than 15 percent of the vote to participate in the debates — which ain’t gonna happen. Knowing this, it’s only fair to assume that the only other avenue for third parties into the debates is to garner more voters, which will entail toning down the anti-corporate rhetoric, bending a little, getting the funds and then challenging the system from the inside. But Nader won’t bend, and his unwillingness to sacrifice a few principles for the greater good that he purports to stand for smacks of a certain kind of pretentiousness of a different stripe. One more sophisticated and less easy to detect. But then, it’s quite possible that Nader and the other third-party candidates don’t really want to participate in the debates. Perhaps they only wish to stand behind the velvet ropes, jeering and mocking the system, playing the victim while the game rolls on without them.
Respond: letters@boulderweekly.com
back to top
|
| |
