By capitulating to the Republicans, as he has on other matters, he surrenders moral authority on struggles concerning the health, safety, and well-being of individuals and the environment.

You don't really have much of a say in this considering you helped elect one of the most devastating politicians for the environment in American history.

You'd rather feel good about your ego, than accomplish anything.

But by all means, Good luck with that "Nader Party" getting a 2/3rd's vote in the Senate.

-David Ahlport

Nader did not elect our current President, we (supposedly) did.

Blaming and name-calling is also egotistical.

The nature of this issue will not change: drilling will not lower gas prices.

Let's keep the pressure on!

Jeremy Terhune San Joaquin Valley Rep.

"Nader did not elect our current President, we (supposedly) did."

Nader probably did not cause Florida to go for Bush (if it actually did) in 2000.  

But his presence on the ballot risks splitting off a portion of the ballots that might swing an election away from the candidate who would be more likely to aid the environment.

I can't see his running as anything but shallow-thinking egotism.

He needs to find other ways to get attention.  

When will democrats take responsibility for the supreme courts appointment of GW in 2000?

Please stop using Nader as the scapegoat for your loss in 2000. In 2004 as a strategy to combat 3rd party candidates the 2 party system made it more difficult for Nader and others to get on State ballots. Which, obviously didn't work out in the democrats favor. Another option might have been that democrats could have built a campaign that included the issues and values of the unrepresented 3rd party voters. Maybe another 4 years of republican rule will convince democrats that they only have themselves to blame. one last cynical point 3rd party candidates actually represent the people where as the two party system primarily represents the special interests that financially support their campaigns.  So there

Four years ago, one of the leading founders of the Sierra Club said that "the Clinton-Gore administration has done more to harm the environment than the Reagan, Bush, and Bush Jr. administrations COMBINED."

"One of the leading founders of the Sierra Club"? Why don't you use his name?

Betterthannader,

"how 'devastating' the Bush Administration has been able to be has more to do with the complicity of the Dems than anything."

More than anything? The Republicans were in charge of both houses of Congress, the executive branch, and most of the federal judiciary from 2000-2006. So what exactly do you mean?

grist.org

Google him and throw in the word republicrat and you'll see some nice vintage qoutes and articles.

I know it is hard to believe, but yeah it's true. Overall, the Clinton administration sold us out big time to corporate interests. I mean, Hillary was on the Wal-Mart Board of Directors for crying out loud!!! Harvard is really nothing more than a factory for corporate laywers.

Wow, lots of bitter angry people here still in denial I guess. Anyway, I personally think Ralph Nader is the only truly Green candidate running for President.  He has a life-long track record of support and accomplishments for green causes. I can't dismiss, belittle, or ignore that fact. I don't think anyone else should either.

If Nader was not running for president, the race might not be so close and Obama might have been able to resist the public pressure for drilling.

For me, it seems clear that our country needs another political party. One that is committed to social and environmental justice. Obama seems great, as far as he goes. But will gettin him elected change much? I really doubt it. Both the Donkeys and the Elephants represent the status quo structure of power. For social and environmental change to happen, we need a different economic structure. The Haves, whether Donkey or Elephant, benefit immensely from our current economic structure. The Donkey/Elephant candidates need the Haves' money in order to get elected. The Haves get their money from the current structure. A merry-go-round, if you will...that brings us closer and closer to environmental collapse.

We need a whole different approach--wholly outside the current paradigm.

Nader represents such an approach.

It takes time to change structures of power. Voting over and over for a Donkey or Elephant, hoping for different results, well...perhaps that's one of the definitions of insanity.

I vote over and over for Nader because I believe we need a deep, fundamental restructuring of our economic structure. Voting for Nader shows that. Besides, if the bad guys have rigged the voting machines,all the more reason.

my .02

My take on Nader is that if he would've started organizing his own party from the ground up say, back in the 80s, and focused for many years on building and publicizing that organization, by this decade perhaps he'd really have a viable 3rd party.

But he didn't want to do all that drudge work, and have that much patience for that many years, so he just started going off on these quixotic "campaigns" based only on personal charisma and reputation. These have just been ego-trips.

So Nader campaigns for president purely on ego. He has no concern for the constitution or democracy and his platform for giving people back their rights and stripping corporations of theirs is all to fuel & feed Mr. Naders ego...

And to be clear, the candidates that we hear from so often, and see on TV, and read about in newpapers, and magazines, and listen to on the radio do not have ego's?

Seems a bit reductionist

I judge the behavior of people,  I am cocksure of my own ignorance,  it seems that there are too many (adult-children) in the U.S. Immaturity runs rampant, and sometimes the ends justify the means, to wrestle power away from the immature, aka. adult-children,  If I have read him correctly, Obama will not drill offshore. The rules between mature people, are not same as the rules are between the immature and mature.  Sometimes power needs to be seized, even through deceptive means, peacefully, but deliberately.  The fear tactics used by the GOP needed to be neutralize, even through political flip flops.  There will be many pleasant, surprises from   Barack      Oh by the way, I think mature people have a high level of self-control, a high level of humility and a high level of empathy, the depletion of the later two, make up the GOP

Question all authority, especially your own.

I judge the behavior of people,  I am cocksure of my own ignorance,  it seems that there are too many (adult-children) in the U.S. Immaturity runs rampant, and sometimes the ends justify the means, to wrestle power away from the immature, aka. adult-children,  If I have read him correctly, Obama will not drill offshore. The rules between mature people, are not same as the rules are between the immature and mature.  Sometimes power needs to be seized, even through deceptive means, peacefully, but deliberately.  The fear tactics used by the GOP needed to be neutralize, even through political flip flops.  There will be many pleasant, surprises from   Barack      Oh by the way, I think mature people have a high level of self-control, a high level of humility and a high level of empathy, the depletion of the later two, make up the GOP

Question all authority, especially your own.