Ralph

The furor created over the announcement that Ralph Nader has decided to enter the Presidential fray has been pretty pathetic to witness, from my vantage point. This man has every right to run, and those who denounce him with the fervor of rabid dogs should be ashamed of themselves.

That being said, Nader has yet to adequately address many questions, including what he will do if it looks like his candidacy will increase the possibility of a Bush victory come next November and what his campaign is supposed to accomplish, since he is not running under the Green Party banner.

Even more relevant, however, is whether Nader's entry can bring issues to the fore that would be downplayed, if not outright ignored, by the Republican-Democratic "duopoly" that exists in the United States.

More to the point: it's quite clear that Nader is willing to raise issues in a tenor that Democrats, like Kerry and Edwards, will not and, well, cannot. The sort of faux-populism exhibited by both of these upper-class Democrats has become fashionable in the last 5 months, but I am hardly struck by their ability to speak the obvious about "free trade," the burdens of empire and go-it-alone wars, and other vagaries of class war from above.

While no radical, Nader at least has the background and pedigree to substantially challenge the "agreeable center" on issues like corporate malfeasance, media consolidation, environmental degradation, and out-of-control militarism.

In short, give him a chance. He's open for criticism, like everyone else, but those concerned with the trajectory of American politics should be wary of denigrating Ralph to the extent that the issues he raises are implicitly marginalized.

Oh, and lastly: hey, Ralph, have you heard about this fellow named "Kucinich"?