Now that everything has calmed down, maybe Ralph Nader can get back, back , back to doing what he was best at

Tip of the Hat to Kathleen Parker; or, an Update on Harrogate's Father, a Nader Sympathizer and Ohio Voter

Harrogate has long resisted the urge to proffer a Tip of the Hat to Kathleen Parker, whose ideological leanings diverge so dramatically from Harrogate's own.

But really, you've got to hand it to her. She took an awful lot of flap for simply pointing out Palin's vacuousness. But she did not back down. Like George Will and Andrew Sullivan and "Christo" Buckley, Parker doesn't like it that the GOP as currently configured represents an almost total capitulation to the most vicious anti-intellectual impulses in this country. And so they are complaining about it. They want their Party back. And there is nothing wrong with this, indeed, this revolt might well lead to a more moderate, reasonable GOP in the future, should Obama win.

Parker's recent column, wonderfully entitled "Maverick's Tragic Flaw" and linked herein, is a doozy, a must-read for those following the GOP implosion.

Explaining McCain's choice of Palin, Parker actually writes this:

As Draper tells it, McCain took Palin to his favorite coffee-drinking spot down by a creek and a sycamore tree. They talked for more than an hour, and, as Napoleon whispered to Josephine, "Voila."

One does not have to be a psychoanalyst to reckon that McCain was smitten. By no means am I suggesting anything untoward between McCain and his running mate. Palin is a governor, after all. She does have an executive resume, if a thin one. And she's a natural politician who connects with people.

But there can be no denying that McCain's selection of her over others far more qualified -- and his mind-boggling lack of attention to details that matter -- suggests other factors at work. His judgment may have been clouded by ... what?

Science provides clues. A study in Canada, published in New Scientist in 2003, found that pretty women foil men's ability to assess the future. "Discounting the future," as the condition is called, means preferring immediate, lesser rewards to greater rewards in the future. (Harrogate's emphasis)

UPDATE: Parker's article is so awesome Harrogate now adds another snippet from it:

The Canadian psychologists showed pictures of attractive and not-so attractive men and women to students of the opposite sex. The students were offered a prize -- either a small check for the next day or a larger check at some later date.

The men made perfectly rational decisions, opting for the delayed larger amount after viewing the average-looking women. You know where this is going. (Women, by the way, were rational no matter what.)

That men are at a disadvantage when attractive women are present is a fact upon which women have banked for centuries. Ignoring it now profits only fools. McCain spokesmen have said that he was attracted to Palin's maverickness, that she reminded him of himself.

Recognizing oneself in a member of the opposite sex (or the same sex, as the case may be) is a powerful invitation to bonding. Narcissus fell in love with his own image reflected in the river, imagining it to be his deceased and beloved sister's. In McCain's case, it doesn't hurt that his reflection is spiked with feminine approval.

As my husband observed early on, McCain the mortal couldn't mind having an attractive woman all but singing arias to his greatness. Cameras frequently capture McCain beaming like a gold-starred schoolboy while Palin tells crowds that he is "exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief." This, notes Draper, "seemed to confer not only valor but virility on a 72-year-old politician who only weeks ago barely registered with the party faithful." (Harrogate's emphasis)

Heh. But anyway. Last night Harrogate had a long talk with his father, who had called to announce his decision to vote for Barack Obama in the upcoming election.

"What finally swung it," asked Harrogate. "Was it the incontrovertible nature of my arguments, the beauty of my speech, the sheer magnetism of my political thought?"

"Pish! 'Twas none of that," stated old Dad from his residence in Ohio. "I just watched the McCain/Palin interveiw with Brian Williams. And it is important that Palin go back to the utter mediocrity from which she came, and to which she belongs. I just couldn't believe the words coming out of her mouth. No wonder even Colin Powell has endorsed Obama."

No wonder, indeed.

GOP to Voters: We Will Either Rule the World or Destroy It

And so winds down the end of a big blog spree from Harrogate. But Harrogate needed to pass this along, a must-read for all Americans.

Apparently, John McCain sees the Democratic presidential candidate as not worth addressing by name. While McCain downgraded Obama's status to the subhuman "other" in the second debate, he refused to even acknowledge Obama's presence in their first meeting. This should strike viewers as quite disturbing, considering that the whole point of a debate is for each candidate to directly engage the other's issues and stances.

and

Increasingly, right-wing conservatives and Republican political leaders are issuing dire warnings to the American public that they – and only they – are the legitimate rulers of the United States and the world. This basic contempt for anything but one-party rule is manifested in a number of dire threats repeated by the party, with its members promising the end of Western civilization as we know it if they lose their dominant status in government.

And then for all you Nader sympathizers out there: Harrogate Truly Madly Deeply symathizes with ye. But hearken to these words before ye go splooge yer inviolable principles all over the voting booth:

The Democratic Party today may be morally bankrupt, spineless, and bland, but none of those are anywhere near as dangerous as the Republican Party's fundamentalist contempt for multi-party elections and bi-partisan politics.

Who Won Last Night's Debate???

Ralph Nader's views were pretty clear.



That's right. Ye hear Bill Maher right. It was in reference to Ralph Nader that he said "This should be the voice of the Democratic Party."

Hmmmm. But not today.

But One Day. Hopefully during our Children's Lifetime. There will be a Party with real stroke, with real representation in Congress and with a real shot at the White House, that takes our Republic with the seriousness that it deserves.

Because we are not there yet, sad fact 2008. Is the only reason Harrogate can think of, not to vote for Ralph Nader.

In the end what we have, those of us worried about the corporate lockdown and who would rather not raise our children to die young, for reasons nobody can even articulate, let alone credibly defend, is the same ole lesser of two evils reasoning.

Yes, the Dems are a lesser evil, Obama is a lesser evil. And MUCH lesser. This is the argument to make against Ralph Nader's candidacy.

Nader Wants Oxymoron and Mrs. Oxymoron to Write Him In

The New Nader Ad Part Deux (Harrogate and Oxymoron Got A's in a Graduate Level French Course)

Jeralyn at TalkLeft continues to build on her her heroic creds. Unhappy with both Clinton and Obama in the Primary, she sided with Clinton, not as a feminist statement but because she believed Clinton was to Obama's left on criminal justice issues.

Then when Obama won she found her way strongly into his camp, despite her strong difficulties with his criminal justice record. And even with the selection of Biden for VP, who Jeralyn has been skewering for years as a Drug Warrior and a Draconian advocate for all things Prosecution. Even then, Jeralyn did what Democrats ask us to do: understand that the dangers the GOP poses are so much more severe than the Dem Standard Bearers, that the first order of business has got to be to get the GOP out of Power.

All of which brings us to the beauty of this post, which responds to the Nader Ad that no less prestigious a personality than Harrogate celebrated only moments ago. Here is a piece of blog-writing from that post that is fit to bring a smile to the face:

I would like to see Nader's VP candidate, former public defender Matt Gonzales, in the Biden/Palin debate, just so the public could get a sense of what a progressive agenda is about on criminal justice issues. Between Biden, who's never met a crime bill he didn't like and Palin, who probably can't even understand one, it would be refreshing and enlightening in the way Dennis Kucinich, whose position on issues most closely match mine, was during the debates he participated in.

Exactly.

Tip of the Hat to the New Nader Ad; Or, First and Foremost, Harrogate is "In the Tank" for Progressive Politics

He damned sure aint talking to a parrot in this one. Great use of music, too. And nothing in this Ad is untrue. Indeed, the truth may be hard to take for Progressive Democrats (those that are left) to take.



Ouch. Is it any wonder that The Nader is now polling at a Staggering 10% among Ohioans????? 10% of Independents in the State of Ohio. Just think about that for a moment.

Keep ignoring these issue at thy peril, Obama. Actually. Unfortunately. It is at all our Peril.

Why Some People Like Ron Paul. Number 700 Billion. Oh. Also, Nader Predicted This Would Happen

Harrogate posted this You Tube Video long ago, roundabout March or so. At the time he stated that Paul was the only candidate in either party who was getting You Tube videos made with captions such as "Ron Paul Courageously Speaks the Truth."

Some Die-Hard Reaganomicons, like Andrew Sullivan, are voting for Obama but really, really love Ron Paul. On Friday's Real Time, Sully stated that the current Wall Street crisis vindicates not Noam Chomsky, but Ron Paul. Hmmmm. As though there are only those two choices.

Harrogate, be it remembered, thinks Ron Paul is only slightly undeserving of nutball status, and wouldn't vote for Ron Paul for the proverbial office of dog-catcher. Because Harrogate is not a Concrete Jungle Greenblood Economic Conservative. But still, Harrogate is human, and he was once young and a little Green Blooded Himself. Yea, he once thought Ayn Rand an important thinker. And now looking back on those innocent days of yore, Harrogate cannot help but appreciate it that of all the Political Figures that made a play for the Presidency this time around, it is Ron Paul who rests his platform almost completely on the Altar of Liberty. That, friends, is why this video exists, because somebody was inspired by the idea of freedom, and Ron Paul was their spokesman. And it is why Harrogate now embeds it, for the second time.

Also, what an appropriate song for the United States' Rhetorical Situation, at this moment in time!!!!



Oh BTW. Nader warned us that this K Street shit was gonna happen

OMFG. Or, One Man and His Parrot Take on the Empire

The recent Nader Ad. Harrogate just noticed that Andrew Sullivan also has this up on his blog but--SURPRISE--all Sully has to say about it is, it's "weird." So no Tip of the Hat for Andrew "Reagan Was Awesome But Gays Should Have Rights" Sullivan.

But, friends. Here is the unvarnished crux of the matter. Nader continues to make noise on his web site and in Ads and in his fundraising, about the "Media Blackout" on his candidacy.

Honesty demands first of all that we acknowledge that there has been a Media Blackout on his campaign. Reality would dictate that as close as this election is, the fact of his candidacy (and Barr's, for that matter) would be getting serious play.

Harrogate has made arguments in the past that this is also an issue of respect. 6% of the electorate nationally is a lot, and Nader's power in swing states looks to be huge.

But there is something else. Harrogate calls it the People Like To Pretend To Be Surprised factor. During the 2000 campaign Nader was also blacked out by the corporate media. But then, after the cataclysm known as Election Day 2000, media pundits couldn't get enough, talking about Nader. They went on and on about how he torpedoed Gore in New Hampshire, for example.

So here's a prediction that really shouldn't be necessary. Right now Nader doesn't exist as far as Barack Obama and the corporate media are concerned. But following election day, if Obama loses in a squeaker. And Nader carries between 4-6% in places like New Hampshire and Michigan, and McCain has won those states.

Then people on television will talk a lot about Nader.

Really, how stupid is that? Why not address the issue now when something can perhaps be done about it?

So here ye go, Readers. One very Assy McGeee kind of man, and his parrot, take on the corporate media behemoth. Ignore this at thy peril.

6% Is a Lot: Obama Must Go After Nader

That there is a chunk of voters Obama could seriously tap into and in Harrogate's opinion, at no risk with the centrists he is courting.

We've already seen the results of Nader wreaking havoc in New Hampshire. Harrogate likes to call it "8 years of George W. Bush." But look at the Michigan numbers!

It's simple. Say Ralph Nader's name. Attack Nader specifically by agreeing with him.

An Open Letter to Barack Obama; or, The Specter of Nader Draws (Vampiric?) Strength from the Fact that Some People Like Ron Paul

Every vote counts. Solon noted yesterday that Nader is on the Pennsylvania ballot. Actually if you look at Nader's website you will see that Nader will likely be on every ballot except Texas, North Carolina, Indiana, and perhaps one or two others.

And so. Will Obama do what Gore did and act as though The Nader does not exist. Harrogate wants to take this opportunity to remind everyone for the zillionth time that, had Gore taken New Hampshire in 2000, Florida wouldn't have mattered.

Opinions will differ on how to deal with the people leaning Nader. Harrogate has a lot of respect for these people. They have legitimate complaints about the way our federal government operates, and the way it does not operate. 6-10% of the electorate is a lot. Writing them off is not only impolitic for a close election, but it is moreover rude.

Harrogate's opinion on how to deal with them? Show them respect by courting them. Court them aggressively. Verily, Barack Obama needs to run Ads in Swing States attacking Nader by telling his voters that he cares about Nader's issues. Does Obama mean it for example when he says we need to stop giving tax breaks to companies that exploit cheap overseas labor? Does he mean it when he says that the tax code as currently configured makes a sham of our market system. Does Barack Obama mean it when he champions civil liberties? If he means these things, he needs to say them to audiences with whom he has not yet registered. If he had time to go on Rick Warren's set, by God, he's got time to show these people the respect and attention that they and their concerns deserve. And you know what? Even in those areas that Barack Obama fundamentally disagrees with Naderites: say, on FISA for example. He could at least show them the respect of saying look, I disagree with you, and here's why. People don't take kindly to being treated as though they don't exist, as everyone who went to high school knows well.

On a practical level, moreover. Harrogate thinks it is self-evident that Obama can attempt to persuade those leaning Nader without alienating his center-right contingent. At this point in our History, the only people who are not sick to death of the corporate takeover are far right ecocons and the far right social cons who don't care about anything but abortion and boys kissing.

The moderate undecideds, however, will not begrudge Obama going after the Nader base. In Harrogate's opinion.

Meanwhile, go here to see Nader's latest strategy of assocation with Ron Paul. Hmmmmmm. That's a lot of votes untapped by either Party, suddenly. Rather than ceding them to Nader or Barr, why not at least make an effort at them? At any rate, it seems to make more sense than going after "PUMAS", who either don't exist or who are so self-involved and petty that rational persuasion isn't going to work on them anyway.

"PUMAS" if they exist are saying we're taking our ball and going home unless you make a spectacle of yourself by grovelling. This creates a defunct Rhetorical Situation. But Naderites are saying, we have principles and we are sick of those principles being ignored. That is to be respected. Lesser of two evils surely is not the best argument that Barack Obama can make.

To Barack Obama--Thank You

A lot of people are writing a lot of things about Obama's speech last night, and understandably so. But for Harrogate, a lot of it is still sinking in. It did something no modern political speech has ever done for him--it put him on defense, it made him think seriously about what his politics really are, and where they are going from here.

It is hard to explain, but knowing Harrogate personally, perhaps some Board Members will sense what he's getting at. For example, there was a time when for Harrogate, the social conservative element in America was the most loathed of its parts. That has been eroded over the last eight years, and in ways that Harrogate cannot quite articulate, Obama reminded him of why that is. Obama also reminded Harrogate of the truism that total agreement is not necessarily the endgame for political affiliation. This is not to say policy doesn't have crucial importance. But sense of life is just as important, and while ideological differences abound between them, Barack Obama's sense of life is very appealing to Harrogate indeed.

At this point it is hard to imagine Nader peeling away Harrogate's vote from Obama, even if he gets on the ballot here.

DNC Protestors Versus Fox News

Already the DNC Protestors are out in force. Here's a confrontation they have already had with a FOX camerman/anchor/whatever. Apparently they didn't get Harrogate's Memo that the diff between FOX and the other cable media is no more profound than the diff between green M&Ms and other M&Ms....

For the first thirty seconds or so it is a bit hard to watch, as the suggestion of crowd violence is palpable. Nice job by whoever uploaded this video by the way. The Carlin-esque chant is in mid form, from the beginning.

And the guy at the end is priceless. Yea, Harrogate wants to go to Denver and buy this guy a drink. Check out his deadpan delivery of: "Some people say FOX is a corporate whore."

Somebody asks him, "some people say what?"

"FOX," he repeats, "is a corporate whore."

Well, there's no arguing with that, regardless of your individual position. Some people do, indeed, say that FOX is a corporate whore.

Obama, Orwell, & the 'O for God's Sake' Category

O For God's Sake. Now, Harrogate thought it mildly amusing when, after the invasion of Iraq, Bush supporters began the "'W' stands for Women" tripe. But then comes this:

George Bush had his three-fingered W salute that supporters flashed when greeting him at presidential campaign events in 2000. And now, if a Los Angeles creative agency gets its way, Sen. Barack Obama will see fans meet him with his own salute like the one above. "Our goal is to see a crowd of 75,000 people at Obama's nomination speech holding their hands above their heads, fingers laced together in support of a new direction for this country, a renewed hope, and acceptance of responsibility for our future," says Rick Husong, owner of The Loyalty Inc.

.....Some are even begining to whisper that Obama's running mate is going to be one of the Aggie Yell Leaders.....

"You interlace your hands in a circle, the interlacing being a symbol of different types of people coming together and the circle a symbol of unity," he says.

.....But then maybe this stuff isn't so funny after all.....

"We want to see it everywhere, but more importantly we want this sign to take the world by storm."

As a human being, Harrogate is embarrassed.

And Speaking of the "Cheetos Brigade": America's Rich Are Being Soaked, and Papa Bear O'Reilly Is Pissed

Okay, so maybe Nader's platform is flawed. Papa Bear O'Reilly puts it all in perspective for us. Blinded by deceitful rhetorics of economic justice in America, we were not able to see the truth. But the spin, as it were, stops here. Leftist America is taking his money, and giving it to the undeserving: lo and verily, this ought not to stand: it is time American stopped beating up on the top 1 percent.

Snippety snippets:

That means that people who drink gin all day long will be getting some of my hard-earned money. Folks who dropped out of school, who are too lazy to hold a job, who smoke reefer 24/7 all will get some goodies in the mail from Uncle Barack and Aunt Nancy, funded by me and other rich folks.

Under the Republican Bush administration, tax money presently pays for abortions, Viagra, condoms, sugar-laden food, dangerous housing in blighted neighborhoods and prescription drugs that will send you to the land of Oz.

But if you complain about any of this, you're an uncharitable greedhead.

Well, I am complaining. I don't want my money supporting some layabout who wants to get high all day long. Robin Hood wouldn't give those people money. The feds shouldn't either.

"Layabout" is a great word by the way.

The Nader: 6 Percent and Rapidly Rising. But, Should His Voice Be Included in Debates?

He's so . . . well . . . ASSY. And, in so many ways. But yet, even challenging, let alone deconstructing, the real veracity of his actual politics is an enterprise to which our flacid Media are notably unequal. As they do in just about every substantive area, they simply choose to murder through omission.

Earlier this month, John Nichols had an interesting piece on The Nader, as well as other fringe candidates. The article provides an illuminating, if only cursorily so, glimpse at the state of multiparty politics in the United States.

Writes Nichols:

A striking 6 percent of Americans who are likely to vote this fall back an alternative candidate: Independent Ralph Nader. Another 3 percent back Libertarian Bob Barr.

Those are some of the highest percentages in years for independent or third-party candidates. And they matter, especially Nader's 6 percent.

And then there's this:

Will any independent or third-party candidate reach the 10 percent threshold this year? Nader appears to be best positioned to do so. Despite scant media attention, he has polled in the 4 to 6 percent range in several polls. Getting up to 10 percent will be hard. But as Obama softens his positions on civil liberties, political reform, trade policy, presidential accountability and ending the war -- issues on which Nader has long focused -- his prospects improve.

And one does not have to be a Nader supporter to hope, for the sake of democracy, that they improve sufficiently to earn him a place in the Google/YouTube debate and other fall matchups. And if Nader gets in, why not Barr and likely Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney?

The only real quibble that emerges from Nichols' pro-republicanism piece is his assertion that Obama's positions have changed in the recent news cycle. But this is far, far more a reflection of the news cycle itself than of Obama, who has for the most part been pretty damned consistently honest about who and what he is. All pathetic gnashing of teeth in certain quadrants of the blogosphere notwithstanding.

The Nader, Part the Second: His Letter to Rush Limbaugh

Ralph Nader's July 10th letter to Rush Limbaugh is pretty interesting.

Limbaugh, many will recognize, recently received a new 8 year contract to stay on the radio, a contract totaling some $300 Million Dollars. From Nader's letter:

You, Rush Limbaugh, are on welfare.

As you know, the public airwaves belong to the American people. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is supposed to be our trustee in managing this property. The people are the landlords and the radio and TV stations and affiliated companies are the tenants.

The problem is that since the Radio Act of 1927 these corporate tenants have been massively more powerful in Washington, DC than the tens of millions of listeners and viewers. The result has been no payment of rent by the stations for the value of their license to broadcast. You and your company are using the public's valuable property for free. This freeloading on the backs of the American people is called corporate welfare.

Nader is like a national artifact. Too thoughtful, too honest, too wonkish, too boring, too self-righteous to ever win. But retaining enough of a slice of the disaffected among us, to impact a national election.

Say what you want about him. Harrogate has said, and before it is over will likely say, worse things about him than any of you. But one thing Harrogate has never heard someone do, and that is actually show that Nader's platform is flawed.

The man speaks the truth far more often than not. Which makes him that much more of an asshole, perhaps.

The Nader

Always fun to excerpt from the Washington Times gloating over the state of the Democratic Party in a year where the GOP Brand is as soiled as it has been in years.

Saturday in that hallowed periodical, on the verge of the Senate's Embrace of Unaccountable Wiretapping, appeared the following headline:
Obama's move to center irks left: Blogs demand return to liberal orthodoxy


Now, this headline is patently stupid. Despite the deluge of Talking Points since the beginning of July, Obama has not in fact "moved to the center." Indeed, as Andrew Sullivan has delightedly pointed out, Obama was never into "liberal orthodoxy" (read: liberal positions on issues). His campaign is about "improving the tone in Washington," about "bringing people together," and most importantly ladies and gentlemen, it is about winning.

To Left Bloggers like the Kos Kidz and the Huffington Army, who have felt so betrayed all month, Harrogate has a message for ye: "He has not changed. It is rather that ye are catching a glimmer of truth, that you wrote onto Obama what you wanted to see, and now you are realizing that your writing it did not make it so."


Verily, how fitting that he will not be giving his acceptance speech at the Convention proper. Will he even speak there at all? It would perhaps be better if he did not. Just let the other speakers sing his praises to heaven, and then bring down the curtain on the Veep nominee and drop five or ten balloons. Yes, it will be a Rhetorical Spectacle and the pundits will drool.

But another thing that it will definitively do, it will drain the actual convention. It will emphasize that Obama is not carrying the Democratic banner. The Party for him is a vehicle, nothing more, nothing less. He could just as easily be holding his acceptance speech in Chicago.

Where does your hero and Harrogate's, the selfless Ralph Nader, fit into the equation?

In the past week alone, Democratic advocacy groups say their Web sites have been lit up by angry complaints attacking Mr. Obama's character and honesty, threatening to withhold their contributions, or worse, shift their allegiance to independent candidate Ralph Nader.

"We've been hearing more from voters who are disconcerted about Obama's move to the right. We're hearing from antiwar folks, civil-liberties people and other activists concerned about his flip-flops and considering voting for Nader," said Chris Driscoll, media director for the Nader for president campaign.

"We've had a big increase in the past couple of weeks in our Web site hits and our online fundraising contributions," he said.

A CNN poll of 906 registered voters reported this week that Mr. Nader's support has risen to 6 percent, potentially enough of a margin to deny Mr. Obama close-fought battleground states.

Aint life grand.