MPDGs and Me

Recently Ruby Sparks was released on DVD and Blu Ray.  It was a film that came out at the tail end of the summer and flew under most people's radar.  It starred Paul Dano and Zoe Kazan as well as being written by Kazan.  The real draw to the film was that it was directed by the crack husband and wife duo that brought us the fantastic Little Miss Sunshine, Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris.  This is only their second directorial work together and there was a lot of excitement around the film.  Many people were hoping lightning would strike twice and the magic that was Little Miss Sunshine would return.

The bar was set very high by Dayton and Faris and while most critics favor the movie I feel that they didn't quite cross a hurdle.  I do, however, find it a very interesting and engaging film, one with a story that poses a lot of questions regarding relationships with lovers as well as with our own subconsciousness.  That wasn't what drew me to it initially.  My curiosity stemmed from knowing that Ruby Sparks is a film that had one of the most blatant uses of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl to date.

The Manic Pixie Dream Girl, or MPDG for short, was a term coined by A.V. Club critic Nathan Rabin and is now used widely to describe the usually two-dimensional, female love interests that populate more and more movies.  By his definition they are "that bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures."  They are most certainly quirky, with little backstory and when they come into the life of the hero/protagonist, it is inexplicable why they fancy him in the first place due to his sad, morose nature.  But once the MPDG is in the protagonists life, his spirits are fully rejuvenated as she shows him a new side of life through spontaneous adventure.

Things don't always go well between the protagonist and the MPDG.  But whatever chasm that might grow between the characters matters little, because there is always a lesson to be learned by the protagonist in hopes that next time he will do better, act better and be better.

I know you're thinking of a few movie characters right now.  Sam (Natalie Portman) from Garden State, maybe even Claire Colburn (Kirsten Dunst) from Elizabethtown, but most certainly Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel) from (500) Days of Summer and you would be right.  These are women who exist solely for the purpose of the men that desire them.  They act as muse, giving the hero back his confidence that has been lost.  By showing him an abundance of unearned but much desired for love and affection, the man discovers how great life can be and is able to conquer the obstacles that stand in his way.

Here's the thing, my true confession.  I adore Manic Pixie Dream Girls.  All those movies I listed are movies I love.  I even love Elizabethtown.  I don't even think Cameron Crowe likes Elizabethtown!  I harbor a deep fantasy of unexpectedly meeting a quirky girl who sweeps me off my feet and shows me the value of life through her spontaneity because I see myself as one of those brooding, sensitive and soulful young writers who is very guarded and needs a little push to open up.  I relate to these protagonists on a very deep level and I understand how bad this is.  Actually this is worse than bad, this is terrible.  I'm letting this much derided character model dictate my romantic desires and expectations while playing into the hands of these usually weak male characters.

Much can be said as why the MPDG archetype is damaging for all people and Ruby Sparks illuminates many of those points.  The film follows the life of Calvin Weir-Fields, a young novelist who wrote a highly acclaimed novel when he was nineteen, went on to fame and fortune but has slipped into a mindset that keeps him from writing.  It's the ten year anniversary for his novel, Heart Broken Old Times and everyone is excited about what he might write next.  He goes to therapy often to try to deal with his many emotional issues but he seems to find anxiety everywhere.  It is as if his block extends far past writing and into life itself.

His therapist issues an assignment hoping to shake him out of his current state.  He asks him to write a few pages about meeting someone.  That night he had a vivid dream where he was in the park reading.  A stunning red head comes up and starts talking to him about his dog.  They have a very strange conversation and upon waking, Calvin feels inspired and begins to write.  Excited about having a new project, he fills in more and more of this mystery woman's character.  He names her Ruby Sparks and sets her birthplace at Dayton, Ohio (because it sounds romantic).  He makes her to be a firecracker.  She got kicked out of High School because she slept with one of her teachers and he gave her a long list of past bad-boy boyfriends.

Eventually Calvin begins to find strange feminine items around his house like a woman's razor in his bathroom and colorful lingerie in his drawers until one morning he finds the woman from his dream eating cereal in his kitchen.  Horrified, he rushes out of the house thinking that he has gone insane.  Ruby soon finds him and that's when Calvin learns that other people can see her because she is a real person.  He literally wrote the literal girl of his dreams into existence.  They begin a whirlwind romance all dictated by Calvin as he continues to write his book.  All goes well until Calvin's feelings for Ruby begin to change.  Calvin must learn to love reality or he might loose Ruby forever.

As I watched the film I couldn't tell whether the filmmakers were unaware of how misogynist this all came off or if they were purposefully laying it on thick as to comment on the MPDG archetype. Calvin is a character that at times is so repugnant that sympathy for him is easily disposed of.  Despite his meek and bookish manner, he exhibits many domineering male characteristics that are shared with abusive partners.  He doesn't like Ruby leaving his apartment and he disproves of the idea of her getting a job.  He can also re-write Ruby's characteristics to his pleasing.  Twice Calvin made Ruby French and when she talked she mysteriously forgot the English language.

Now, it could be argued that this was part of the point.  As the film draws closer to the climax, Calvin makes small changes to Ruby in order to correct changes that he made previously.  In one almost disturbing sequence, Ruby is made never to leave Calvin's side after Calvin senses Ruby's desire to move on.  Ruby becomes a terrifyingly clingy girlfriend that can't deal with not being in contact with Calvin to the extent that she bursts into tears if he so much as gets up to answer the phone.  With each new change Calvin makes to Ruby, she becomes less desirable, and in effect less human.  There is something liberating about having him lose control of his fantasy, however I feel that this message is far more subtle than the one paraded through the rest of the movie of you gotta find a woman that you can change.

And that's at the heart and what is so disappointing in this film.  Ruby seems like a fun, smart and all around terrific girl who any man would be lucky to be with.  However she is not her own person.  She did not exist before Calvin and their relationship is an ever shifting kaleidoscopic of tropes and clichés because that is what is in Calvin's head at the time.  It's this reason that Ruby Sparks has become the Manic Pixie Dream Girl with the least amount of character because it's all Calvin's character.

I'm puzzled and slightly disturbed why Kazan has chosen not only to construct a character that is traditionally two-dimensional, but she also plays her in the film.  Has this largely male fantasy icon pervaded our culture to the extent that even women are now saturated with their personality traits?  Kazan has naturally denied all of this in interviews saying the term is better applied in a critical use more than a creative one.  I will giver her that.  But then she criticized the term for being diminutive and reductive, something that the character of Ruby Sparks definitely experiences in the film. Kazan has a strong disdain for the term of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl but the concept of her still abounds in the film.  In the end I will chose that she meant to comment directly on the trope whether it was a conscious decision or not.

What these movies tell you is that all your problems, shortcomings and failings make you endearing, desirable or otherwise ripe for nurturing and affection.  What real life tells you is that you can never be good enough for love.  You either don't look the part, make enough or say the right things.  Whatever it is, there is an equation to be found.  We are usually lacking in a few aspects and never seem to add up.  Failure is never fun and that's why it's rarely in our movies.  But failure is a part of life and life is much more than 120 minutes.  Why these characters are so attractive is that they are manifestations of the people that we want to be.  They are little more than distilled essences of our own traits and desires that become watered down when even a tiny bit of reality is applied.

The challenge at hand is to divorce my affection from these characters.  I realize that at the heart, these movies propagate an outdated male-centric worldview that's filled with flighty nymphs who pop in and out of existence, and yet I will still watch and love these movies.  They are filled with gag inducing clichés, I know, but I want these clichés in my life more than anyone! I will always see a possibility that a little bit of fiction will become my reality because I know that all fiction is based in reality.  We live life viewing only one perspective and the people around us are little more than characters in a story that can only be told by us.  So why not throw a little fantasy in the mix and have fun with life?  As long as I keep one foot on the ground, I should be fine.

Ruby Sparks got funnier on the second viewing, or maybe I just took it less seriously.  And maybe that's my take away lesson, don't be so serious.  People always tell you to be the person you want to attract, so maybe I should be a little more quirky, unpredictable and fun.  Who knows, I just might run into a Manic Pixie Dream Girl of my own.  I could be someone that she's not usually used to, she could make me an abundance of mixtapes and we could go off into the sunset on some cross country road trip.

Winter weather blunderland

This last Friday I woke up to the biggest snow that we've seen in over ten years. I was really disappointed because I was supposed to go to Charlotte that day and celebrate my friend's birthday. (Happy Birthday Devin!) I had the weekend off as well, how many times can you manage that? Reluctantly I stayed instead of braving the monsterous storm. However, being stuck at home isn't that much better.

I think snow is only fun when your younger. The older you get the more you learn to see snow as a fluffy nuisance. When your a kid all you have to worry about is school and when that gets canceled you then have time for the more important things in life such as video games, sledding, snow ball fights and hot chocolate. It's only when you grow up and get a job or have friends that aren't right across the block that snow looses some of it's magic.

It gets much worse when you have to shovel the stuff. By then no magic is left and you pretty much hate snow all together. I don't want to sound cynical but it's really hard to love something that has you walled in tighter than the FBI at Branch Davidian.

It was shoveling snow that I spent the most productive parts of my day. During that time I managed to pull myself away from my current dislike of the weather in order to snap a few photos documenting it. These are a few that I shot.

Connected. Or how my iPhone is ruining my life

Recently I acquired a device of masterful capabilities.
I can chat and game, I can surf the web and I can even keep up with my blog like I am doing right now. I am amazed every day at what it does that I often wonder at what it can't. This device is none other than my iPhone (or more specifically my iPod touch but iPhone sounds so much more sophisticated.) iPhones have become so mainstream and ubiquitous that you may be wondering why I am referring to it in mystic, shrouded terms like a cnet writer talking about the lasted electro-gadget. I can't answer that, I guess it's my vain attempt to take up valuable bandwidth talking about my life.

But having this, dare is say godsend, has been revolutionary. I can now do so much at one time. I have now become connected, one step closer to downloading my consciousness into the singularity. I have millions of apps at my fingertips now that encourage me to be more productive. I have a calender, an alarm clock and a thermometer. Now I know that these items individually aren't particularly spectacular enough to write about as they are, but when together in the confines of a sleek, black box suddenly productivity has become cool!

However, this sudden connection has me wondering if too much of a good thing is really a good idea. For instance, my family and I are watching the holiday classic Home Alone. Instead of sitting there and being content with laughing at the antics of a small child as he foils the attempts of two bumbling crooks as they try to rob his parents house I found my self itching to multitask. It seems as if I can't sit and do just one thing anymore. I may have an acute case of onset IIPADD, iPhone induced attention deficit disorder.

I've noticed how much my facebook usage has increased now that I can check and update my status on the fly. I've become one of Those People. You know the ones. They're the people that feel the need to announce every mundane moment of their lives. Now I'm no Ashton Kutcher and I still believe I will never own a Twitter account I just think I can now better understand Those People.

There is a more disturbing occurrence, however, and that is how much this thing is taking me away from my simple pleasures. I should really say that it's worming it's way into how I enjoy them. Those that know me also know how much I love to read. Usually I will bring a book to work to enjoy on my break. Now days it seems the iPhone has taken precedence. Its not that I've chosen to check my mail during my 30 minutes of solace, it's just that I found a way to read on this thing as well. I recently got an app containing two-hundred odd classics. And yes, Moby Dick is one of them. Gaming is another issue. Why play on a console when I have all the virtual rapture I can stand on this?

So I ask is there any redemption for me? Can I find peace? I think so, it just may take time, patience and a lot of thumb exercises. Until then I will love every moment spent with my new favorite friend.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone...was there any quesion?

Confessions of a book whore

I am a whore. I am a repulsive, dirty, filthy, sneaky, smutty whore. I sell myself for pleasures untold and pleasures told. I am owned by many and loved by none. I am thoroughly shameless which could be my greatest shame of all. I am a whore of books, a book whore. I am a bibliophile, an obsessively compulsive, mega maniacal collector of all things paper. They say that admittance is the first step to recovery, so here we go.

I just can't stop buying books. It's getting to be a big problem. We'll in this stage of my addiction I would have to say that the only real problem that I face is that I don't have a big enough bookshelf to keep all the volumes that I own. Sometimes I often dream of the bookshelf that I will have; the perfect bookshelf. It would stretch from wall to wall in my living room, ceiling to floor, unobstructed. No TV would have the power to stand in front of this massive monolith of words. Friends and family would quiver beneath its shadow. They would stand in awe of my collection unable to know what to say first, all the while I would calmly and causally say in my most cavalier of voice, "Oh yes, this is my bookshelf. I had to have it custom made. It's from upstate New York. Would anyone care for a hors d'oeuvre?" They would all be powerless against my assumed opinions assuming, of course, that I got them from all the books I read. Pretension would be my sword and I would wield it well. Pulling a rare tome from the shelf as if I were young Arthur drawing Excalibur from the mythic stone, I would read and lay waste to anyone that dared to oppose me.

And then the debate would ensue causing voices to elevate, feelings to get bruised and carne apache to go flying across the room. I'm sure a situation like that is way over the top and could get out of hand pretty easily, but in reality I would pass. What I'm really saying is that I would love to just flaunt my collection at any chance possible, as well as my knowledge about the books I have, providing that I have read them.

But that therein lays the problem. Many of the books that I do own are not currently read. They have been multiplying like rabbits in my room. I have so many "next books" standing in line it's really hard to decide to where to start. There is only so many hours in the day and as much as I hate to admit it, you can only devote a small portion to reading. Still, I will buy a book knowing full well that the likelihood of it getting read is slim, at least in the near future that is. With each book that I take home those chances are pushed farther and farther. As I peruse the thrift store shelves and find and interesting book, simply the thought of reading it makes me desire it. I want to know exactly what is contained within its pages. I will hold it in my hand and flip through it. If it has a cover I'll look at the inside flap or the first page to see what the book is all about. Sometimes if I'm really on the fence I'll just walk around the store with it trying to determine if it's a book I could live with, or live without. Could it be, I ask, if this book in my hands could change my life if only I would let it? If the curiosity is strong enough I will stick it under my arm, claiming it as mine.

However, thinking about this is almost depressing. What kind of fate have I really saved this book from? Instead of being read it's doomed to continue to wait, just on a different shelf in a far less accommodating situation (sitting beside the very loud Black Hawk Down or even worse, the bloodied antisocial, Fight Club. But hey, I do have Stargirl and she is pretty cute maybe it could sit next to her). Will this change my buying habits? Heck no, but it may give me just a little more buyers guilt which is just what I need more of.

Yesterday I had some amazing finds. I bought The Jordan Rules by Sam Smith, a book about Michael Jordan. He is my favorite athlete, I would have to say, but the sole reason I bought it was to have my name blazon in bold print on the hardcover spine as it sits in a prominent spot on my shelf (this one would be eye-level to certain relatives). Also on the list was a Faulkner book with a totally rad title and a very large book of English and American verse. It contained all the greats: Keats, Dickenson, Whitman, Elliot. Really, how could you pass this one up? I'm a bit ashamed to tell what my next pick was so I will just skip to my favorite of the bunch, Nick Hornby's Long Way Down, in hardcover nonetheless. I recently finished High Fidelity which I felt was an outstanding book from and equally great author. It was also purchased from a local thrift store. I can't wait to start this one...eventually.

What made me the most excited of all was that today I was able to complete my collection of the Bourne Series books by Robert Ludlum with the elusive Bourne Supremacy! This feat took about two years of scouring meticulously through dirty thrift shops in more than one state. I find this no short of amazing. I made it a personal quest to get the trilogy directly from thrift stores, partly out of principle and the other part out of book hunter bragging rights. There's nothing more gratifying than completing a book series that was completely second hand. (I've found the entire Asia series by James Clavell in this way as well.) I'm sure twentysomething’s years from now will be doing this with the Harry Potter books or maybe even the Twilight Series.

I also like to get books just for their title. Along with the Bourne Supremacy I found this odd hardcover with the title Pistols for Two. Can this not be the single coolest title for a book ever? Great names like Gone with the Wind, The Grapes of Wrath, and The Fountainhead all pale in comparison to Freakin' Pistols for Two!

So what, then, is the point to all of this collecting? I don't know, we all need a hobby and I guess this is mine. Reading for me is special. There is power in words. Ancient civilizations were built on the written word; people have been inspired to a greater cause because of another’s words and hey, at the end of the day books make a great form of entertainment. Do I have a problem? Maybe I do and maybe I don't. According to the addiction recovery model the second step toward recovery is to believe that a power greater than ourselves can restore us to our sanity. I refuse to believe that I am insane so maybe I'm back at square one after all.

A wolf, an elephant and Ralph Nader walk into a bar...

This election is something else, isn't? I mean we have both sides of the political fence just foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs at each other simply barking up a storm. Everyday it's more of the same. One day someones getting accused of wanting to be like Jesus and on the next day the other guy is getting flack because he just put lipstick on a pig. Ridiculous! That's what it is, all of it. I know we go through this every four years and each time we complain about how the candidates keep skirting the issues instead to talk about Vietnam boating trips, or something like that. But this time around it's almost like both candidates have this "come with me if you want to live!" mentality. It's almost like they think there ain't gonna be a next time so buddy, you had better strap up and jump on cause the train to shangri-la is leaving and if your not on it, well tough, cause when were gone the first horseman is gonna nuke your sorry tail and when your lying there in a pile of ash don't come crying to me because I tried to warn you that the other guy didn't have enough experience!

"Vote for me, vote for me, vote for me!" they say. "Only we know how to give someone free pills, we are the only one that can hog tie the country together, Only we know the secret to world peace. It's not that hard to end a war. We know the secret," one says, "because we studied with the great political master in mountains of Saskatchewan. I snatched that stone from his hand, that stone is mine. I waxed on and waxed off till my political skills are notorious. I have to register my politics in any state I go because it is a lethal weapon. I could swiftly end your debate quickly from just ten paces away, I cannot miss."

"Oh yeah?", the other would reply. "Well your party killed my father when I was just a little boy and now it's time to exact my revenge." And then they would fight, ravaging the land with they're mayhem. Style vs. style, discipline vs. discipline, bucking donkey vs. charging elephant. This would go on non stop for several days as they continue to get more bruised and more bloody, neither combatant showing signs of giving in. They would stop to monologue just long enough to give the impression that something sensible was going on. When suddenly Barack Obama would learn that John McCain was his Father. This being a truth to much for the world to take they would agree to finally to form the ultimate dream ticket. They would put their magic rings together and join their forces vanquishing the free world from all evil.

Come on! Who do you take us for? were not stupid! John McRib and Obama Rama might as well join forces because we'd be getting just about the same choice we have now. It's insane what's going on.

Thank goodness for the third party. Ah yes, the awkward friend that's pleased to hang around despite the ridicule and indifference that it endures. It's really sad what the third party has to go through in the name respect. That's why I'm always pleased when the third party strikes out in a victory.

No, I'm not giving breaking news that somehow Bob Barr's numbers somehow jumped miraculously
a thousand percent but it is something almost as satisfying. This last Wednesday Republican outsider Ron Paul and Independent Ralph Nader appeared on The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer and presented a strong case against the current campaigning process in America.

Here's how it went down:

BLITZER: Let's talk about what's going on right now with third party candidates. Joining us here in THE SITUATION ROOM is Ron Paul, the congressman himself. And he's here, together with the Independent presidential candidate, Ralph Nader.

Gentlemen, thanks very much for coming in.

REP. RON PAUL (R), TEXAS: You're welcome.

BLITZER: All right. Tell our viewers, Congressman, why you decided to reject your fellow Republican, John McCain.

PAUL: He doesn't represent anything I believe in. You know, I represent -- I believe what Republicans should believe, and I campaigned on that and got a lot of support. But I can't support somebody that virtually disagrees with all my positions.

BLITZER: What about Barack Obama?

PAUL: Well, I don't think he agrees any more. And I don't see any difference between the two candidates.

I know there's a lot. You have to have a horse race going, and you have to talk about something, but really there's no difference.

And that was part of -- we think the system is very biased. Our system doesn't allow alternative candidates, third party candidates. But the debate isn't there either because they pick on little things. And the issues that we picked out, we hardly hear anything from the candidates.

BLITZER: So is it fair to say -- you want a third party candidate to win. Would that candidate be the man sitting next to you right here in THE SITUATION ROOM, Ralph Nader?

PAUL: Ralph is a good friend. But we agree on tactics and what we're doing, and we agree on these very important issues, but quite frankly, he probably won't have joined my campaign and I probably won't join his campaign.

BLITZER: So you won't vote for him?

PAUL: No, I don't plan to. But I plan...

BLITZER: Who do you want to vote for?

PAUL: ... to get as many votes for him as possible because it will take the votes away from Obama. And that's where we have the agreement.

BLITZER: So you want to stop Obama, is that what you're saying?

PAUL: Well, no, I want to change the system. I want Ralph Nader and the third party candidates, all of them, to be in the debate. I mean, that's the only debate.

There's no debate going on. This is a ritual. This is a charade.

BLITZER: Let's bring in Ralph Nader.

What's your goal right now? You're not going to be elected president of the United States. You know that. Ron Paul knows that. What is your goal in aligning yourself, in effect, with Ron Paul?

RALPH NADER (I), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, if we're in the presidential debates, it might be a Jesse Ventura, a three-way race. But -- and yet today, we put together...

BLITZER: Three presidential debates, but the Presidential Debate Commission has set a bar that's pretty hard for you to overcome.

NADER: Yes, since it's controlled by the two parties, as you know. Today I think it was a historic day because we, Ron Paul and the candidate for the Green Party, the candidate for the Constitution Party, and me and Bob Barr agreed on four major areas: foreign policy, get the soldiers back, end the war in Iraq, stop being imperialistic, privacy, deal with the repeal of the Patriot Act, the revision of FISA, the Military Commissions Act, and, you know, get rid of torture. And a third is the national debt. You know, deficits are now used for reckless government adventurism.

BLITZER: The national debt has nearly doubled over the last eight years.

NADER: Yes. And the Iraq war is financed from deficit spending.

BLITZER: And the fourth issue?

NADER: And the fourth issue is the Federal Reserve is now a government within a government. It is totally out of control. Congress doesn't control it. It's funded by the banks.

And we either have constitutional government or we don't. Because of this, Wolf, here's the question: Is there anything left for the American people to decide about their country?

BLITZER: Here is what the CNN/Opinion Research/"TIME" magazine poll shows in two key battleground states right now. In Michigan, 45 Obama, 42 McCain. Ralph Nader, 6 percent; Bob Barr, 2 percent; Cynthia McKinney 1 percent.

In New Hampshire, another battleground state, Obama, 48; McCain, 43; Nader, 4 percent; Bob Barr, 2 percent.

You know the accusations, Ralph Nader, that were leveled against you in 2000, that you stole the election, in effect, from Al Gore. He would have carried Florida if you had not been a candidate. You got 90,000-plus votes in Florida. He lost by 500 votes.

What do you say to those people who are saying you're just trying to spoil this election right now for Barack Obama?

NADER: I say two things. They're factually wrong about 2000. If you ask Al Gore why he lost, he'll say it was the Electoral College because he won the popular vote and it was stolen in a variety of ways before, during and after Election Day, from Tallahassee to the five politicians on the Supreme Court.

Now, I have news for you. The last four major polls, when they poll Obama and McCain, and then they poll Obama, McCain and they put Nader/Gonzalez in the poll, McCain does worse. Does worse.

BLITZER: But you think your presence hurts McCain more than Obama?

NADER: That's what the polls say.

BLITZER: What do you think? BLITZER: And it's explained on our Web site, votenader.org.

PAUL: I have no idea. We have to wait and see. But some people say, well, you're going to hurt McCain. And I'm not hurting anybody. But I expect that they'll be as many votes, maybe they will come from the liberals that will vote for him.

BLITZER: Ron Paul, you and I...

(CROSSTALK)

NADER: It's the two parties that are hurting our country.

BLITZER: I want both of you to answer honestly. And both of you are straight forward, you have nothing to hide. Give me your honest assessment right now.

Who is the lesser of two evils right now, John McCain or Barack Obama?

PAUL: I don't do that. Evil is evil.

If you vote for one that you think is a little less, actually you get tricked into that. You think that you vote for a Republican to balance the budget, and they're worse than the Democrats. That's what the people are sick and tired of. You vote for the Democrats to end the war and they expand the war as much as the Republicans.

BLITZER: I'll rephrase the question for Ralph Nader.

Who is the lesser of two bads right now?

NADER: The lesser of two bads is not good enough for the American people. We need the best.

BLITZER: But you agree -- you've been watching politics all these years -- it's unrealistic to assume a third party candidate is going to be elected president of the United States.

NADER: No, but we can push the two parties to address what's troubling the American people economically, politically, socially for their children and the world.

BLITZER: So your goal is to get these four issues on the agenda. And on these four issues that you're talking about, who is better, which of these two presidential candidates?

NADER: They're both bad on these four issues. The great constitutional questions about who's going to run this country in all kinds of ways, the people, or the domination of the corporations over our government, are off the table for McCain and Obama.

BLITZER: So one final question for Ron Paul.

You say you're not necessarily going to vote for Ralph Nader, but you want a lot of your supporters to vote for Ralph Nader. Will you go out there and do what you so successfully did during the primarily campaign, raise money on the Internet for these third party candidates?

PAUL: Probably not, because it's tough raising money for somebody else. We're doing this for some congressional candidates, and it's not as easy as when you're the candidate himself.

So I don't think I will do that. But I want to be engaged in the issues and try to push this country, but I really want the American people to wake up and challenge the system. You can't get in the debates, you can't get on the ballots, the parties are the same. There's really no choice in the system. We don't have good democratic process here.

We go overseas and fight wars to promote democracy. At the same time, we listen to these glib debates going on that's really irrelevant to these four important issues. That's what our goal is.

NADER: Which our majority support.

BLITZER: And we're going to focus in on those issues, because we want to make sure that we get to the bottom of these critical issues for all of our viewers. Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, thanks for coming in.

NADER: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: Some might say you're the ultimate odd couple, but I'll leave that for some of the commentators and pundits.

NADER: Talk to the American people.

BLITZER: We'll see what they say.

NADER: Check out constitutional safeguards. That's the key here.

BLITZER: Thanks guys.

NADER: Thank you.

PAUL: All right.

How awesome was that. That is exactly what the mainstream media needs to hear. What more can I say? Here's to you guys, here's to you.