I'm surrounded by idiots ...

[PsychoSy]

No ... not here. Well, not necessarily ...

I mean here -- IN MICHIGAN!!

It seems the lovely automotive state I have the joy of living in has given the Republican Party another opportunity to demonstrate who's really behind the steering wheel of the 2004 Nader campaign - and who's the crash dummy!!

Last Thursday, the Michigan GOP submitted more than 40,000 signatures it collected to put Nader on the state's ballot as an independent candidate in November - thus helping Ralph sidestep a glitch in his bid to appear on the Reform Party line. Nader abandoned his own Michigan signature drive weeks ago after he was "endorsed" by the right-wing crazies who control the rusting hulk of the national Reform Party. However, Michigan's secretary of state refused to accept the paperwork filed by one of the two self-proclaimed leaders of the state Reform Party, saying the true ownership of the Perot's old jalopy would have to be sorted out in court before Nader could hitch a ride in it. This might have left Ralph sucking carbon monoxide come November since the deadline for submitting the necessary 30,000 signatures for an independent spot on the ballot expired at 4 p.m. last Thursday, and the Naderites only had about 5,000 or so signatures on hand.

But then ......... the GOP cavalry came charging over the hill!!

Strictly in the interest of pluralism and diversity, of course ...

Matt Davis, a spokesman for the [Michigan GOP], said it was merely concerned about third-party candidates being left off the ballot. He could not name, however, another third-party or independent candidate his party has helped.

Now, it's common knowledge the GOP and arch-conservative surrogates like the Club for Growth (by the way, when they say "club," picture the brains of baby seals being bashed out) have been trying to help Ralph get on the ballot in a number of states - with mixed success. But what's striking about the Michigan rescue mission is how ... well deceptive (read: "lying sacks of !&@*!") Ralph and his minions have been about it! When the Republicans first showed up in Lansing with their petitions, Nader's spokesman, Kevin Zeese, initially vowed that Ralph would refuse to accept the GOP's help:

"We have not taken any signatures from them. We won't take any signatures from them," Zeese said.

By Sunday, that "won't" had evolved into a "maybe":

Nader spokesman Kevin Zeese said the campaign still hopes to run with the state's Reform Party. But he said it may have to use the Republican-sponsored signatures: "We have to get on the ballot somehow."

And by 4 p.m. on June 17th - the actual deadline for Ralph to withdraw his independent candidacy (which was the only way he could "refuse" to accept the GOP-collected signatures) - that "won't" had completed its Clintonian evolution into "will":

Presidential candidate Ralph Nader has decided not to withdraw as an independent candidate from Michigan's ballot, even though state Republicans are largely responsible for collecting the signatures that qualified him for the spot.

The 2000 Green Party presidential candidate had until 4 p.m. Monday to withdraw from the ballot as an independent. Nader spokesman Kevin Zeese said Monday that the longtime consumer advocate still hopes to get on the Michigan ballot through the Reform Party, but is keeping his options open.

"We want to be on the ballot in Michigan. That's our goal," Zeese said. "We're going to continue to pursue the Reform Party, but we're not going to close off the independent option at this time while the Reform Party has not decided."

Even though I voted for Nader in 2000, I've been as opposed to Nader's candidacy this year. I've already stated my reasons and won't rehash the obvious now. If the robber baron economics, constitutional obscenity and foreign policy lunacies of the past four years haven't convinced people of the need for a united front against Bush and the authoritarian right, then nothing I can say now will, either. But -- up until the past few weeks-- I've never questioned Nader's motives or his sincerity. As destructive as I think his actions have been, and as much as I detest his stubborness and his increasingly bizarre egoism, I've taken it for granted that Ralph's objectives were exactly what he said they were: to give the voters a progressive alternative to the Republicrat political duopoly. I may have thought he was wrong - disastrously wrong - but I always assumed Nader was basically an honest person. And as high as I know the stakes are in this election, it still made me uncomfortable to see the Dems using hardball tactics to try to keep him off the ballot in as many of the key states as they could. In my book, the Democratic Party was (and still is) just an instrument, a tool - a weak one, but the only one this wretched two-party American system we've got - for fighting the conservative movement and keeping them in check. Ralph, on the other hand, was more like a crazy uncle - a real pain in the ass, but still, when it comes right down to it, family!

But Nader's increasingly open and shameless alliance with the GOP - as demonstrated so flagrantly here in Michigan - leaves me with the sinking feeling that I've misjudged him. Simple stubborness and egoism can't explain everything - Ralph is too smart and too worldwise for that, even if his followers aren't. He knows what he's doing and he knows who he's doing it with. Which leaves me with just two questions, really ...

When did Ralph switch sides?
And why?

Was it money, blackmail, or just wounded pride (the Benedict Arnold syndrome)? What does he expect to get if Bush wins? Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission - a meaningless job for an irrelevant old codger like him?!?! Surely not something as trivial as an ambassadorship. That particular vanity doesn't seem like the kind that would appeal to Ralph. If it's blackmail, what possible financial or sexual sin could give Team Bush such a death-like grip on Saint Ralph? Did he cheat on his taxes, use an intern for a humidor, cook his books (hey, that last one would at least give him and Cheney something to talk about)?!?!?

Personally, I find it hard to believe Ralph would get caught in any jam that a good criminal lawyer - and a contrite appearance on Oprah - couldn't get him out of. He's a hell of a lot smarter than Martha Stewart, and unlike Ken Lay, he'd never fool himself into thinking he'd bought protection. Besides, who would care? It's not like we've a shortage of venality, corruption and lust (not to mention hypocrisy) in this country! My guess is that -- in the end -- Nader's reasons for treachery aren't all that much different from Benedict Arnold's - it's the vanity and resentment of a hero who's seen the laurels of respect and influence he thinks are his due go to lesser mortals instead. Combine that with the towering rage of a prophet ignored, and it's the perfect combination for betrayal. But there are times when treason can be as blind as love or justice, and this may be one of them. I'm sure Ralph still believes he's one of the good guys - maybe the last good guy. I can imagine him right now measuring the handle on his moral spoon and finding it more than long enough to sup with the devil. But that's just one of the acrobatic manuevers an agile mind uses to rationalize evil. It may be there's a part of Ralph's brain that understands what's happening, and is helplessly aghast at what the dominant part of his brain is doing. Or maybe not. Maybe there's nothing left but that angry, ravenous ego, obsessed with its revenge!

In the end it doesn't matter. Ralph's motives are immaterial now. The point is that he has joined (to borrow Saruman's phrasing) with thy enemy, thus so hath become thy enemy. Which, as far as I'm concerned, means the Democrats should use any legal and feasible means to keep Nader off the ballot in as many states as possible ... and more power to them!! Ralph's a lemon - the political equivalent of a '65 Corvair. He needs to be recalled and scrapped just to keep the Republicans from using him to run Dubya's real opponents off the road.

Oh, and our Secretary of State?

Republican.

I wonder if she'll ever be allowed into Republican Heaven after this debacle?

[cam9786]

I feel ya, doesn't this place we live in SUCK!!?

[Clay]

/drats, my scroll where broke again

[pastor]

hey, we are all surrounded by idiots :

[saturnotaku]

Originally Posted by pastor

hey, we are all surrounded by idiots

I know we're surrounded by at least one in this thread.

[Clay]

Oh for crying out loud...Bush was just trying to make Clinton feel better.



Notice too that your pic was just prior to Bush realizing that the covers were on...which he promptly corrected in this pic which is from exact same event.

Clinton, however, just kept staring into his in amazement at these new fangled night vision bi-goggle-noculars.

[ChrisRay]

I wonder when the American people will elect a president who knows how to use binoculars

[pastor]

Originally Posted by Clay

Oh for crying out loud...Bush was just trying to make Clinton feel better.
Notice too that your pic was just prior to Bush realizing that the covers were on...which he promptly corrected in this pic which is from exact same event.
Clinton, however, just kept staring into his in amazement at these new fangled night vision bi-goggle-noculars.

amazing

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Originally Posted by pastor

hey, we are all surrounded by idiots :

Well, the lefties who make pictures like that are too idiotic to know that those night vision goggles work just fine with the lense caps on. You can cover the lense with your hand, and it'll just go dark for a split second, then it'll adjust to the reduced infrared and you'll be seeing right through your hand afterwards. I should know because the Army gave me a course on it

[netviper13]

Originally Posted by AlphaWolf_HK

Well, the lefties who make pictures like that are too idiotic to know that those night vision goggles work just fine with the lense caps on. You can cover the lense with your hand, and it'll just go dark for a split second, then it'll adjust to the reduced infrared and you'll be seeing right through your hand afterwards. I should know because the Army gave me a course on it

That depends on whether they are indeed infrared, or the more traditional light-amplifying goggles.

[UDawg]

I R smart.

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Originally Posted by netviper13

That depends on whether they are indeed infrared

They all are. The military simply doesn't issue anything else.

EDIT: Besides that, I don't think there are any non infrared night vision goggles (with the exception of thermal of course.) "light-amplification" amplifies infrared light.