By TODD BUTKOVICH

Guest Columnist

While the rest of the political world was digging through the sex life of a 71- year-old man, searching for decade-old improprieties or waiting for Hillary Clinton to cry her way out of her month-long slump of primary and caucus losses, another candidate made a largely unnoticed splash into the kiddie pool of the 2008 presidential race.

That’s right, Nader’s back, baby!

On Sunday, Feb. 24, in what must have been the slowest news week of the year, NBC’s Meet the Press invited Ralph Nader, perennial no-chance candidate since at least the pre-WWI era, to announce that he will be running as an independent in November’s election.  

The rest of the interview was largely drowned out by mocking laughter combined with the weeping of millions of Democrats. Given his lack of anything even remotely resembling success in the past, one is prompted to ask why the hell he’s doing it. 

The most vocal anti-Naderites still blame him for Al Gore’s loss in the 2000 election and subsequent weight gain.

Although by the mathematical transitive property, one could just as easily cite Gore’s candidacy as the reason why Nader isn’t the one currently dancing his way across Botswana for no discernable diplomatic reason. 

With the theme of “change” being rammed down our throats, we don’t need another reformer cluttering the campaign, decrying corporations, wealth and enjoyment in general.

Nonetheless, after four years that were no doubt spent complaining to strangers on the street and arguing with cashiers over expired coupons, Ralph has dusted off the only suit he owns and is out there once again, out-crazying Mike Gravel and making Mike Huckabee’s delegate-counting system seem completely rational. 

Not to mention the fact that he makes Fred Thompson look like Captain Excitement.

But don’t get me wrong, Nader has built up quite a coalition. 

In addition to the millions of young ex-Ron Paul supporters to whom the legalization of marijuana is the single vital issue (make that all Ron Paul supporters), he’s also got those who love to vote but hate being on the winning side.

But, after three months buried in 11 feet of snow and three-hour drives down icy quarter-mile stretches, I doubt a man dedicated to fighting global warming will win the sympathies of the Midwest and the Eastern seaboard. 

And one can’t legitimately expect fiscal responsibility from someone who is willing to waste millions of dollars on a “Nader for President” run.

Which brings us back to the original question: Why is he bothering? 

=” font-size: 9.5px; line-height: 10px;”>

After receiving far less than one half percent of the popular vote in 2004 as an independent — and after being dropped by the Green Party, which is now likely to endorse Cynthia McKinney, a former Democratic congresswoman best known for physically assaulting a Capitol Building security guard in 2006 — his prospects look even worse in a race where the electorate actually seems to like the two major candidates. 

The only logical conclusion is that the man must love failure.

And after eight months spent doing occasional cable news interviews, holding rallies at quarter-full VFW halls, and not appearing on televised debates, all while polling well below the margin of error in all major voter surveys, 2008 may just offer the biggest failure yet.

There’s not even a reason to believe he’ll vote for himself this time.

Say what you will about Ralph Nader, but he represents the greatest part of American democracy: anyone can run for president.

Of course, he also represents the worst part of American democracy: anyone can run for president.