#20180: — 03/28  at  08:00 AM
I am a bit skeptical of that article. The way that its written with, for instance, single quotes being attributed to both individuals makes its pretty shady in my opinion. Not that Nader hasn't already done enough to damage his legacy and reputation at this point or that its impossible that he holds this position, but that article seems wrong in a number of different ways. I think I will retain some doubt on this one for the time being.

#20182: PZ Myers — 03/28  at  08:18 AM
Yeah, when they write,

“A profound injustice is being inflicted on Terri Schiavo,” Nader and Smith asserted today.

don't you just picture them both speaking the words in clone-like synchrony?

#20183: Trish Wilson — 03/28  at  08:20 AM
Ralph Nader lost credibility with me when he ran for President the first time Bush won, but this just clinches it for me. While I've declared my blog a Terri Schiavo and Michael Jackson Free Zone, I will say one thing. It's ironic that Schiavo is going to die of starvation when she ended up the way she did because of bulimia.

#20185: Ben — 03/28  at  08:22 AM
Can you tell a foreign observer what you have against Nader specifically? He seems alright, just a bit idealistic. Is it still bitterness over 2000, or am I way off?

#20187: PZ Myers — 03/28  at  08:31 AM
Idealistic would be tolerable and understandable. I think he started out as an idealist, but he has since crossed the line into obsessive egotism.

I heard him talk last year, and he was good: he's a strong, vocal progressive. But he seems unable to let a progressive cause succeed unless it declares him their leader.

#20189: — 03/28  at  08:38 AM
Sorry. The more that I look at that article the less I like it. At first read, it was just that it felt wrong and the business with the quotes just jumped out at me but as I re-read it, it just seems less and less likely that Nader really has anything to do with it.

1. I have already mentioned the quote issue but, especially with a story like this, wouldn't there be at least one direct quote from Nader himself?

2. Is the article written by Nader and Smith or about what Nader and Smith said? The byline issue is rather confusing.

3. If Nader were going to take the rather extraordinary position of aligning himself with the Discovery Institue wouldn't he mention his reasons for that in the article or wouldn't there be some context given for such an alignment?

4. Nader is many things, but he doesn't tend to be blatantly dishonest. The points laid out in that article are deliberate distortions and in some cases outright lies. The bit at the end which I assume is about stem cell research is particularly choice. We may have problems with his political choices, but does that really sound like Nader to you?

Yeah. This article is bullshit. I really wouldn't trust it without sepaking with Nader about it directly.

#20190: Douglas — 03/28  at  08:43 AM
Long time reader, first time poster!

I agree with PZ on this one. Ralph Nader doesn't seem to understand, that many things can be done within the system. Instead of trying to fix the system completely from the outside, there needs to be some internal fixes.

Thus, if he fealt that certain issues were ignored in government, he should work with the people most likely to help him fix those issues. He doesn't have to be president. He seems to be unable to distinguish between allies and adversaries.

#20193: — 03/28  at  08:57 AM
I agree with Brent: this is very fishy. Googling Nader Schiavo only reveals that one quote by Nader and Smith (I know that sometimes multiple authors cowrite a book or a paper, but how do two people co-say a one liner?).

#20195: Douglas — 03/28  at  09:08 AM
Doesn't anybody think that her husband would know her wishes? He is the one who has made the decision for her. He has the leagal right to make that decision. Her parents have deluded themselves to the point of thinking that Terri can be better. Maybe she can, and maybe she can't. However, it is her husbands decision to make, and he has made it.

#20197: Ben — 03/28  at  09:14 AM
http://www.nader.org/interest/032605.html

Seems fairly impartial to me.

#20198: PZ Myers — 03/28  at  09:15 AM
The Discovery Institute is a sleazy outfit, but also a politically savvy one. I would be very surprised to see them fake a collaboration with Nader. I wouldn't mind seeing them caught committing outright fraud like that, but I think that far more unlikely than that Nader is on another crusade, and is accepting anyone as an ally.

#20202: Ken Cope — 03/28  at  09:23 AM
On the Discovery Institute's biotethics link, Smith is described as a "former Ralph Nader co-author." That may explain the bizarre attribution of quotes.

I was able to find names of a couple of books they co-authored. These include No Contest: Corporate Lawyers and the Perversion of Justice and Getting The Best From Your Doctor.

"Discovery Institute's program on bioethics encourages public speaking and debates, radio and television interviews, short articles and op-eds by Fellows."

One of the ways Smith accomplishes this appears to be hitting up his old pal Ralph and pumping out a press release, and getting his opinions in print via his spouse, opinion columnist Debra Saunders.

#20204: — 03/28  at  09:33 AM
brent: Is the article written by Nader and Smith or about what Nader and Smith said? The byline issue is rather confusing.

It's a "joint press release", according to Wesley J. Smith's blog, http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2005/03/ralph-nader-and-wesley-j-smith-joint.html.

Apparently Smith and Nader have collaborated on several things in the past. (Do a google search for "Ralph Nader and Wesley J. Smith".)

It's possible that Nader and Smith share some common interests without their sharing an interest in Intelligent Design.

#20205: Alex Merz — 03/28  at  09:34 AM
The release lists Nader as an *author*. If he's not, DI is engaging in forgery, a practice that I've not seen them engage in.

#20209: — 03/28  at  09:54 AM
I definitely stand corrected. I think the citation by Ben pretty much settles it. His argument is a bit more nuanced in that article but relies on similar distortions. Hard to believe but here we are.

#20210: — 03/28  at  09:54 AM
Apparently Smith and Nader have collaborated on several things in the past. (Do a google search for "Ralph Nader and Wesley J. Smith".)

And see this page,

http://www.nader.org/shortbio.html

#20216: — 03/28  at  10:56 AM
Sorry to get off topic but...

There was apparently another godamn earthquake just southeast of Banda Aceh! (sp?) 8.something on the Richter scale. Bad news in the days ahead, I'm afraid.

#20217: — 03/28  at  11:24 AM
OT - I just wanted to congratulate PZ on escaping the hangman's noose,
and commiserate with him for his martyrdom in an alternate ending.

Then I saw neadertal2's post. I hope it's not as bad as it sounds.

#20222: Republic of Palau — 03/28  at  11:40 AM
Looks very big on the USGS map here. I hope the geography may mitigate the tsunami's effects somewhat.

Poor people, haven't they suffered enough for a while?

#20228: Jim Flannery — 03/28  at  11:58 AM
It's just press-release speak. Nobody actually says this kind of quote, some PR guy writes the release, including the "direct quotes" and the CEO or whoever approves the text knowing that the "direct quotes" will be the ones that show up in the paper.

From what I can tell from a quick read, text is the same as the version that went out on NewsWire:

#20231: — 03/28  at  12:01 PM
I agree that the article does seem rather fishy, but outside of issues related to corporate power, the guy has never been terribly progressive or tolerant.

During the 2000 election, he dismissed gay and reproductive rights as irrelevant "gonad issues".

So while the article may be iffy, I won't be surprised at all if it happens to correctly characterizes his views, or if the damn guy is some sort of creationist taboot.

#20235: — 03/28  at  12:40 PM
I used to grant Ralph some grudging respect, now I grant him none.

#20237: — 03/28  at  12:51 PM
When the last huge quake struck Indonesia, Bjorn Lomborg was putting it about in newspaper columns that it was a waste of money working on quake warning systems in the Indian Ocean because there would be `no more large quakes there for a century or more' (based on his usual gross misunderstandings of statistics and a new misunderstanding of geology: you'd think an *economist* would understand about risk/reward ratios).

I never thought I'd say this, but it's a real shame he's been proved wrong...

#20267: Jim Flannery — 03/28  at  03:20 PM
One side benefit of Nader involving himself is Digby devoting a ton of inches to DI, wedge document, etc. this morning.

#20273: Jim Flannery — 03/28  at  03:50 PM
Dang, how did i miss the update at the top of the page? Never mind :-\.