I suppose this is Ralph's fault, too
Eric Alterman, who I generally respect and, yes, even admire, often says at his blog, "Altercation", "Thanks, Ralph", when reporting bad things done by the Terrible President. As I have written him, however, and he did not publish as a letter, is it Ralph Nader's fault that the Democrats in Congress:
* failed to mount a filibuster against Ashcroft for Attorney General, who, at the time, had just lost his senate seat to a dead man and was not known to have any friendships with most members of the Senate (the Republicans would not have hesitated to filibuster the choice of Nader for A.G. in a truly progressive administration);
* supported the Terrible President's skewed tax cuts;
* supported the Terrible President's invasion of Iraq;
* supported the bankruptcy bill that made it difficult for poor people, or people in poor health who cannot afford their hospital bill--but not well-off and still powerful corporations--to secure protection from creditors;
* supported the CAFTA the way too many did with previous screw-workers-and-peasant trade agreements during the Clinton presidency;
* accept the terms of the debate put forth by the Terrible President and his Stalinist minions on talk radio and talk shows on television that criticizing the president after 9/11 was akin to treason?
No, it's not Ralph's fault because Gore would likely have gone through an impeachment process, as did Clinton, had the events of 9/11/01 occurred on Gore's watch--just for starters. And if anyone thinks the Republicans would not have ridden 9/11 to a win against "President" Gore on the "issue" of "national security," then they have no understanding of the patterns of American politics.
Now, we have Russ Feingold (who, in 2001, did vote to confirm Ashcroft in the misguided spirit of "non-partisanship") placing in front of the Senate a resolution to censure the Terrible President for his misleading conduct to the nation and to the Congress. And what does "rising star" Senator Obama of Illinois have to say. He says he "hadn't read it."
And then there is Senator Schumer of New York, who, says Dana Millbank in his spot-on article for the Washington Post, to which I have linked above, decides he has "no commment" and can't say when he might have a comment.
Oh, and lest we forget, Senator Diane Feinstein of California, who once proposed a bill to censure Clinton, can't seem to find a way to seek censure of the Terrible President, who only misled the nation about war, about Medicare funding requirements concerning the cost of his prescription drug reform, and now his flouting of the FISA court system when wiretapping Americans for which there was no probable cause of any criminal behavior.
Here is a portion of Feinstein's censure resolution, which I should add, failed in the Senate for varying reasons (Republicans thinking it was too watered down and really good, as opposed to Feinstein, Democrats thinking it was too harsh a statement for the Senate to make), and in which I have taken out Clinton's name and replaced it with "the president" where appropriate:
Whereas (the) president of the United States...deliberately misled and deceived the American people, and people in all branches of the United States government;
Whereas (the president)'s conduct in this matter is unacceptable for a president of the United States, does demean the office of the president as well as the president himself, and creates disrespect for laws of the land;
Whereas (the president) fully deserves censure for engaging in such behavior;
Whereas future generations of Americans must know that such behavior is not only unacceptable but also bears grave consequences, including loss of integrity, trust and respect;
Now, does anyone really believe the Terrible President currently occupying the White House, as well as Mr. Other Priorities, his supposedly "vice president," cannot fit within those sentiments? The only way to say the Terrible President and Mr. Other Priorities don't fit is if one parses the words the way Clinton parsed the word "is."
The Democrats in the senate who have literally hidden from Feingold's resolution should be ashamed of themselves. And anyone blaming Ralph Nader in 2006 for this cowardice of the Democratic Party leadership is enabling the continuation of that cowardice.