“I was a volunteer at the Green Festival in Washington DC, over the weekend and the last speaker on Sunday was Ralph Nader. He was signing books at the tent right behind my assignment (collecting donations, cleaning up, etc.) I’m not a huge fan of his, but I do admire his work. So right after my shift ends I stood in line at his signing/meeting tent. His book was on sale at a separate tent, but so were some 50 other peoples, so it wasn’t exclusive for him. It was my turn so I walk up to him and ask if he can sign my Green Fest tote bag (gift for mom) and he says “I don’t sign bags” right after he said that I was a little disenchanted but quickly snapped back and asked him if he had ever heard of the Consumerist…”
“After some old people confusion and asking how often it was published I clarified and said for like the 3rd time that is was a website and I got a “I’ve never heard of it” Anyway, my point is after being sort of forced to buy his book to get an autograph (how’s that for consumerism?) I now find out that he has never heard of Consumerist, so in essence he sucks all around. Right after I left the Fest the first thing I did was pick up an over-priced Carmel Mocha at Starbucks. Suck it Nader! I still won’t eat at McDonalds or Shop at Wal-Mart, but I didn’t need that guy to tell me that, I do have common sense.
Love the Consumerist (but not Nader),
Emily
PS: I didn’t buy his book. $30 is so not worth it for his autograph.”
Thanks, Emily. We got a good chuckle out of your letter, and the image of an young activist drinking a Starbucks as a rebellion of sorts against Ralph Nader, a great rebeller himself (and also a man we genuinely respect and admire.). How fickle the emotions of youth are! Politicians better be careful trying to court this demographic come 2008. If you don’t shake their hand the right way, they might become anarcho-syndicalists and agitate for your downfall out of spite.
Also, Dear Ralph Nader,
Please read The Consumerist. We think you will like it.
Sincerely,
The Consumerist
More From Consumerist
-
Nestlé Recalling Nesquik Drink Mix Because Chocolate Milk Shouldn’t Contain Salmonella
-
'Your Baby Can Read' Charged With False Advertising Because It Didn't Prove Your Baby Can Actually Read
-
Wireless Companies Hope To Cash In By Pushing Everyone Into Unlimited Voice Plans
-
United Airlines Mobile Boarding Passes: Save Time And Trees, Lose Frequent-Flyer Points
-
Kate Spade Store Demands Proof I Didn’t Steal My Wallet Before Repairing It
Maybe it isn’t necessary for Nader to read the Consumerist because he has staffers whose job it is to scan the news for issues. As long as he gets the information presented here, it doesn’t really matter if he knows the blog’s name.
@FEJJNAGAF Even if it was the left’s ulterior motive to end the war by cutting off supplies to Iraq, it wouldn’t be “putting our troops directly in harms way”. The Pentagon doesn’t just send troops out into the streets without guns or food because they couldn’t ship them to Iraq. Also it must be said that there are many ways to get supplies into Iraq– Turkey is not the only path. Spare us the political FUD.
@dualityshift: We’re all old enough to be dead. It comes at all ages.
Nader’s tragedy is that he has no charisma and is not particularly friendly. I’ve tried speaking to him once at a booksigning and he wasn’t any friendlier.
American presidents are typically the “old, wise and dependable father” or the “uncle you’d go drinking with”. Nader’s the bitter cousin that nobody wants to invite for thanksgiving.
As for him ruining the chances for Gore in ’00: Bull***t. If the Democrats run a brilliant vice president like Gore against the rehabilitated son of a one-term president and still need those measly 3% that went to Nader then the problem is with the dems, not with Nader.
Case in point managing to have a decorated war hero like Kerry lose on the military issue to said undecorated soldier.
This post is a perfect example of why Nader wouldn’t read Consumerist. Only 15% of anything posted here is worth reading. Having said this, that 15% contains some real nuggets. Nothing Nader wouldn’t already know though.
No hate, just common sense.
I don’t like Nader much anyway.
Don’t like Republicans or Democrats either. Anyone who has to depend on being “popular” for a living isn’t the sort of person I would enjoy talking to.
Politicians.. Bah!
@BensAngel:
If you don’t like Consumerist, you are welcome to take your common sense back over to Gizmodo.
@tcolberg:
Go ahead and deny the facts:
Close to 85% of ALL of the supplies that get to our soldiers in Iraq come through Turkey.
So while there may be other ways to get the supplies in, switching is a nightmare and a completely unneccesary one at that.
It isn’t a partisan thing, it’s a factual thing. Right now, as we speak, there is a water shortage in Iraq for our troops. We are barely getting them enough. Considering the fact that most of it gets moved through Turkey, how long until there isn’t enough if this resolution passes and the supply lines are cut off? How long do you think it will take to divert close to 90% of our supplies through another safe supply line? Is that worth it? We should condemn the horrific past (from 90 years ago) as a genocide and slap an ally in the face NOW? Right now? This makes sense to you? Seriously?
@Consumerist Moderator – ACAMBRAS: Hey, fair play, I didn’t say I didn’t like it. I don’t expect you to satisfy 100% of the population 100% of the time. As I said, “no hate”. Perhaps I low-balled you at 15% though.
@forever_knight:
I hate you. Why do you read this?
@BensAngel:
“No hate” — words to live by.
“The Consumerist” has gained me as new reader. I did a search on “Nader” and now I have heard of the site. Thanks!
No, Ralph Nader doesn’t sign bags or t-shirts and probably wouldn’t sign your cast either. Nevertheless, he has been and probably still is this country’s greatest private citizen since Martin Luther King, Jr. He probably would sign something you presented to him that can be read. Perhaps this says something about his feelings about celebrity status.
If the Democrats and Republicans had allowed Nader and Patrick Buchanan into the debates in 2000, which those two parties owned, Nader might have won the debates and become president. Have you read George Farah’s “No Debate”? There ought to be peoples’ debate, not party-owned debates.
Ralph Nader may be around for years to come and that’s a very good thing. His mother and father both lived into their 90′s. See “An Unreasonable Man” and try to remember why so many enthusiastically rallied, campaigned and voted for him in 2000.
Now, let’s look at reforming the election process in productive ways: How about Instant Runoff Voting or Preference Voting? How about instant voter registration? How about voting on weekends or setting Election Day as a holiday? How about no Electoral College? How about easier access to the ballot by third, fourth, fifth parties or independent candidates?
How about shortened election calendars? How about fewer polls and more news coverage of issues? How about voters talking less about who can win and more about who should win? How about voters talking less about voting strategy and more about policies? How about a discussion about the role of the U.S. in the world and where the younger generation intends to take this country?
One more point: How about a discussion about why those in this campaign’s major party debates who would prolong wars are applauded and why those candidates who advocate for peace are nearly laughed off the stage? Who are we as a people?
Of course Gore and Bush were different – in 2000, Bush didn’t want to engage in nation building. Gore had chastised Daddy Bush for leaving Saddam in place in 1992, claimed Saddam had WMD and terrorist connections . He also supported Clinton in the NATO (not UN sanctioned) bombing Serbia and Sudanese aspirin factories, and decimating hundreds of thousands of Iraqi kids under sanctions. And who can forget NAFTA? And the Telecom Act of 1996?
No – I’ll take an honest, intelligent and hard-working Nader over another DLC flunky like Clinton – or a Republican.