That Warm Toasty Feeling
October 20, 2000 11:06 PM   Subscribe

That Warm Toasty Feeling
Here is a guilty pleasure that I can no longer keep to myself. Toasy is a new blogspot blog written by a friend's younger brother. Along with his vivid accounts of dreams (well written and never boring) toasty has a fantastic essay on Ralph Nader that should inspire all to think a little harder about who they are voting for.
posted by DragonBoy (6 comments total)
rob's only been around a few weeks and he's already excellent, and certainly better at this than i am. can i at least take credit for introducing him to blogger?
posted by bluishorange at 11:57 PM on October 20, 2000

Thanks for this. Inspirational stuff.
posted by ceiriog at 8:04 AM on October 21, 2000

First of all, here is the aforementioned essay about Ralph Nader, for those of you who like to get right to the point.

From the essay:

The Green Party isn't perfect and Ralph Nader will not be our next president, but if the party receives a certain amount of the vote, they will be here to stay. They will be taken seriously and stand as a watchdog over our government, protecting our citizens from injustice. (emphasis mine)

OK, doesn't FAIR already do that to some degree? What about the Freedom Forum? Also, despite their total meltdown into laughability and oblivion, wasn't this supposed to happen with the vaunted Reform Party nipping at the 2-party system's heels?

If this is about choice, I'm all for it. But I'm not buying into this pipe dream that a third party in and of itself is going to matter one iota to the status quo.

Ask yourself this: If Ralph Nader DOES win the election, and really does become President, how well do you think he'll bring the 2 parties together towards a "new vision for America"?

Don't you think that the 2 parties will bend over backwards to make Ralph look like a putz?

Remember, the Republicans ground the Government to a virtual halt by not passing the budget, in a failed effort to make Bill Clinton look like Pee-Wee Herman. You'd think that "the bums" would have been swept out on their collective asses after that stunt. Guess what? They're back. Again, and again.

The President is little more than a figurehead. Remember, you don't elect Presidents, you elect Administrations.

Sure, our choices are: Poop, Turd, Nice Try, Not Even, and But Seriously Folks, but to put blind faith in a ceremonial office is to indeed get what you deserve.

Change begins at home, my friends.
posted by ethmar at 2:39 PM on October 21, 2000

Ethmar, you make a good point about the presidency. Just about every critical comment Shrub made about Clinton/Gore during the last debate attacked the legislation that the Republicans blocked in congress. Of course, Bushy did not blame all the partisan bickering on the Republican majority, instead he says it is all Clintons fault.

So, Bush's main message is that he will lay down and let Congress do what it wants? I am not sure if that is a good idea at all.

Oh, and I posted the lonk to Toasty because I thought the writing was exceptional, not just the Ralph Nader essay.
posted by DragonBoy at 11:59 PM on October 21, 2000

I don't fault you for linking to Toasty at all. I'm just getting a bit saturated with pie-eyed enthusiasm for Nader (and any other Presidential Candidate, right down to Joe Walsh). The President ain't all that and a bag of chips. That's why he's paid accordingly. :-)

So, Bush's main message is that he will lay down and let Congress do what it wants? I am not sure if that is a good idea at all.

Well, that in a nutshell is what he does down here in Texas. Want a powerful Governor? Try Louisiana. Want a rubber stamp? Here he is. Not that Gore's much better.

I'm more interested in what kind of Administration either/or is thinking of fielding.

posted by ethmar at 7:45 AM on October 22, 2000

OK, ethmar, I didn't read the Nader essay you linked to, so shoot me if I'm being irresponsible. But I did want to say a few things about your comments.

Yes, FAIR, the Freedom Forum and many other groups are government watchdogs. But a more powerful Green Party would be more than a "watchdog." Watchdog groups get media coverage and rant and rail about all types of things to whoever listens, and God love 'em for it. But watchdog groups are simply not political parties. So a Democrat, for example, is not going to be worried about losing votes to someone from FAIR in any election anytime soon. And FAIR's audience may be quite marginal among that election's voters--meaning that the candidate can blow off anything FAIR says and not take a hit in the votes. But that same Dem could be worried about a Green Party candidate in the same race, and could be moved to address some issues he/she usually wouldn't, or adopt some of the Green rhetoric (as I think Gore has done in his populist talk this campaign).

That kind of competition has advantages that ranting/railing doesn't.

Another thing: I don't think Nader is going to win this election.
Even he doesn't. Now, if I seriously thought he was going to win, I'd definitely be worried about his ability to lead. He'd obviously have a tough time building enough of a coalition in Congress to get things done. (There's an understatement!)

However, if Nader really did think he could win, I think he'd be concentrating more earnestly on convincing voters that he could lead, just like Bush and Gore have been trying to do. So I might feel better about him, in that alternate universe. Of course, the pressure of actually, possibly winning might also make for a more pragmatic Nader that we supporters wouldn't like as much. Maybe, for now, we should be happy that he doesn't stand a chance. We can have our granola and eat it, too, eh?
posted by nedlog at 8:52 PM on October 22, 2000

« Older Group photo from the last MeFi lunch get-together.   |   Now I know fathers want their kids to follow in... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments