Sign-In

STORY

Share

Ralph Nader Coming to LSU

[19 Comment(s)]

By Jonathan Specht

Ralph Nader, an independent candidate who is running for president and has previously run in 1996, 2000, and 2004 will be appearing at LSU’s School of Music on Wednesday, September 17 at 7:30 PM, in the Coral Room #115. Learn more about Nader and his views at www.votenader.org. Following is an interview with the candidate.

 

Why should a college student vote for you, and not one of the major party candidates?

Because I won’t betray them, lie to them, deceive them, turn my back on what is of concern for them. Like student loan rip-offs, lack of affordable health-care after they graduate, and their future jobs being sent overseas. Even white collar jobs are now being sent to India and China. I also want to get rid of this boomeranging war on drugs. We don’t send nicotine addicts or alcohol addicts to jail. We treat them. I want to clean out our jail cells of those who are arrested simply for being addicts, and throw corporate criminals into their cells.

 

You’ve previously said that the Democrats ought to win by a blowout this year, given conditions in this country. After recent polling showing a tight race, do you stand by that statement?

They always manage to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. They have gone to the corporate side of issues more and more, and blurred the distinctions. Voters want clear distinctions. They want bright lines. Here’s a choice: I’m offering a very clear distinction. Democrats have lost ground, but they can recover it. There’s growing unemployment, rip-off credit cards, huge waste in the military budget, and bailouts of Wall Street crooks. They can win if they hammer those issues home. Democrats always keep going to the right. It’s a losing strategy. Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry, and now Obama have all done it. They rely on liberal voters because they have nowhere to go, and try to snatch two or three points from the right.

 

But after Senator McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin, can you still say there isn’t a clear cut difference between the two tickets?

With that pick, McCain is cloning himself in image of Bush. But Democrats aren’t hammering the issues home that working Americans care about.

 

You’ve said that you’d like to see 16 year olds be able to vote. Do they have the level of judgement necessary to make a decision that serious?

Yes. If we lower the voting age, they will get excited, and they can really have discussions with their teachers in class about the issues. Then they’ll run home and talk about it at home. You know, when you’re 18 and you go off on your own, you lose enthusiasm. Sometimes the younger people really take it more seriously. If you’re old enough to drive and work, you should be able to vote.


Why aren’t you endorsing Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney?

Because I’m running. We think we’re number three nationally in terms of support, way ahead of the Green Party. We’re at 6-8% in support depending on the state. I gave the Green Party a big boost in 2000. But they tend to be petty and divisive, and can’t stay together as an organized party. The Green Party is only 31 state parties, and they’ve been around for decades. We’ve only been running since May, and we’ll be on at least 45 state ballots.

 

In terms of being “organized,” wouldn’t it be better to be running on a party ticket?

Well, it would be good to have another party, but the ground has to be laid first. We need people who are willing to do the work of putting together an organization, and not just show up to rallies and be excited and then go home.

 

We recently had the seventh anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, and Osama Bin Laden is still alive. How would you defeat Al Qaeda as president?

We’ve been doing so many wrong things over there that we’re becoming a recruiting magnet. Our occupation in Iraq is a magnet for new members of Al Qaeda. We need to be humanitarian superpower. Military power in Afghanistan is not working, Admiral Mullen even said so recently. We need more efforts at growing infrastructure and creating jobs to win over the people of Afghanistan.

 

But wouldn’t those doing community work in Afghanistan need protection?

Yes, they need protection, but pretty soon that gets the local community, the tribal leaders against them. Whereas if the local people are starving and people come and give them money and bread, then they get rooted in the communities. If you try, you’re going to be able to.

 

How would you improve science education in this country?

We need to define science more broadly to help local communities. What we need is science for the people. Science should mean people testing drinking waters that big companies are selling to communities for pollution, testing polluted soil, looking for lead contamination in toys. That’s the kind of science we need to be teaching our students. Medical research needs more emphasis on prevention, on fighting things like TB and malaria, and not products like Viagra.

 

How would you change our tax system?

We would first tax that which society like the least or dislike the most. We would have a securities tax, derivatives taxation, tax the addiction industry, higher gambling taxes, a carbon tax and tax on other pollutants. Then we can give tax relief to workers.

 

But couldn’t a carbon tax become a burden on the working class?

Well, you don’t do it at the gasoline pump level. You do it way way upstream. You make sure that speculation on Wall Street doesn’t raise prices to begin with. Second, you get alternative energy to be more efficient. You can rebate some to the people if it does affect prices at the pump. Eventually, we’ll have hydrogen cars, industrial hemp, and solar energy, because carbon-based technologies will be dis-incentivized.

 

You mentioned industrial hemp. Do you think the oil industry is preventing industrial hemp from becoming legal?

Yes. Why can we import it from Romania, France, and China, but can’t have our farmers grow it? The farmers want it. The people want it when they learn about it. Even in the paper industry, some are coming around because we’re running out of forests. It makes great paper.

Originally Published: Issue 705 - September 17, 2008

Share on Facebook
Back to the top

Comments

  1. "Because I’m running." What a prick.

    Buggles | 2008-09-17 - 02:40:10 PM (CDT)
  2. Would John McCain endorse Barack Obama?

    Third parties are treated like second class citizens.

    Each candidate is running to win the election for him, or her. I believe that’s the way it’s supposed to go.

    Ralph has been actively trying to open the debates to the Independent, Libertarian, and Green Parties so they can have a voice.

    At his Open the Debates Super Rallies in Denver and Minnesota, the LB and GP got a chance to speak. If you look at his interviews he wishes Cynthia McKinney and the Green Party luck and doesn’t hate on them whatsover.

    As a dissaffected Green supporter, he is right on about them not having their sh*t together. I believe now, though, with McKinney, she’ll get that party in line. She don’t play...

    Nader/Gonzalez ’08
    "People Fighting Back"

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-17 - 04:05:03 PM (CDT)
  3. Goog interview, by the way! Solid.

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-17 - 04:07:17 PM (CDT)
  4. "Good interview" I meant to so. (Spent too much time on Google I guess...)

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-17 - 04:08:18 PM (CDT)
  5. Nice interview! agree with Nolan P. I think Nader is smart in not making it about him versus McKinney, because he’s running to push issues and get people involved and it’s great to have more people doing that. However, he is often way too modest. The fact is that Nader is much more qualified and has a record of accomplishments for Americans that McKinney cannot compare to. also, if anyone’s interested in why Nader didn’t go after the green nomination, which he would have gotten this year and in 04 if the Greens would quit using an electoral-college-like system, check out draftnader (dot) org

    betterthannader | 2008-09-17 - 04:26:57 PM (CDT)
  6. The American Ruse &
    when Black Friday comes.

    Honesty or lies?
    Compassion or greed?
    Intelligence or narrow-minded?
    Guts - or go along to get along?

    Ralph Nader
    Cynthia McKinney

    Ron Paul
    Mike Gravel
    Dennis Kucinich

    Jesse Ventura
    H. Ross Perot
    President Carter
    JFK RFK MLK Malcolm

    nader PAUL mckinney | 2008-09-17 - 04:34:36 PM (CDT)
  7. Nader and McKinney are both egomaniacs (of course, anyone who runs for President has to be, at least a little.) But after eight years of Bush, how can anyone who claims to be a Progressive not work to elect Barack Obama?

    Buggles | 2008-09-17 - 04:49:03 PM (CDT)
  8. Because the Democrats are not progressive. If they were they would be winning handily.

    Barack Obama has voted for war appropriations and is in favor of leaving 50,000 troops in Iraq in 22 permanent military bases, sending more troops to Afghanistan, invading Pakistan-which we are doing right now as we speak, and is threatening military action against Iran and Russia.

    He is for the death penalty, off-shore drilling and nuclear power plants, NAFTA- which sent hundreds of thousands of jobs packing, expansion of the Patriot Act and FISA, which allows spying on citizens, immunity from the Telecom companies and credit card corporations, and closed debates.

    You’re going to tell me this is Progressive?

    Please.

    By the way, a true progressive candidate would not pander to the middle class so brazenly as he has.
    What about the poor?? What about the working class??

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-17 - 05:20:39 PM (CDT)
  9. I meant immunity FOR the telecom and credit card companies. And with Joe Biden, AKA credit-card champion Senator Plastic, this kind of favoritism will continue.

    We voted the Democrats in in 2006 on thier promise that they would stop the war and funding has only increased time and time again.

    You want to talk about how bad the Bush administration is? The Democratic Congress has a lower approval rating!!!

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-17 - 05:25:55 PM (CDT)
  10. Unlike, say, John Kerry, Barack Obama was actually against the Iraq War from the beginning. Obama would be the most progressive President ever, but Greens and Naderites would rather shoot the country in the foot because he isn’t perfect.

    Buggles | 2008-09-17 - 05:58:13 PM (CDT)
  11. PS- Military action against Russia? Either you’re thinking of Sarah Palin or smoking something.

    Buggles | 2008-09-17 - 05:59:12 PM (CDT)
  12. If you are ok with paying taxes to help those on corporate welfare, as Buggles appears to be, then continue to support one of these two "major" parties. Are you also ok with a bloated defense (per retired military officers) and the salaries of people from corporations leading government agencies. Believe it is ok we allow these two parties to be controlled by corportations? So we have millions without health care (or subsidised or costly or not enough coverage), a levee which should have been fixed, 935+ lies leading us to war, zero impeachment mandated by "our" constitution, global warming, absurd acceptance of nafta and the wto, the "un" partiot act, media monopoly, campaign contributions so we can live of, by and for those with the means to influence. All with the democrats approval, including the flip flopper Obama. Look at what he changed his "view" on.
    Have you looked at what Mr. Nader accomplished before the takeover? The two major parties are spoiling "our" republic. My vote for Mr. Nader is not a wasted vote. My vote reflects not being complacent and falling for more BS from the two corportate controlled parties. Continue to follow the media who are more into lipstick and other "real important issues" instead of taking the time to "research" the facts and you will play a part detrimental to "our" "democracy."

    Larry | 2008-09-17 - 10:16:06 PM (CDT)
  13. Go Ralph! You were right on the Wall Street speculators, when many doubted you. We need you as President.

    Larry | 2008-09-17 - 12:54:08 AM (CDT)
  14. Buggles- Obama and Biden both mentioned Russia AND Iran in their speeches, implying military action if they "didn’t change."

    Obama is lucky not to have been in Congress so he wouldn’t have to vote for the war; he is lucky to have that cop-out.

    If he is so anti-war, why does he keep voting for war appropriations and why does he want to send more troops to Afghanistan and leave troops in Iraq and want to go after Iran next...?

    Kerry should’ve landslided Bush. It’s emblematic of the broken-down, sorry a** Democratic Party. If they were worth a damn Obama would be miles ahead in the polls. But,as I noted above, he is just like a Republican. Why don’t you address those points I listed, instead of ignoring them and covering your eyes and "hope" for "change."

    I’ve followed the blogs and boards and people have left Obama disgruntled because he changed completely after the primaries, going hard right. Many of them donated money and felt betrayed. From their own words, many of them went on to support the Nader campaign. Another example of the importance of third parties.

    If you’re not happy with your party, you have a chance to support another one that supports your views and ideologies. Instead of having to keep all the frustration inside with nowhere to go.

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-18 - 01:15:42 PM (CDT)
  15. Just another Democrat fallacy: "Obama was against the Iraq war from the start!" He wasn’t even IN the Senate then. So stop with that crap. And he has voted over and over and over to continue supporting that war along with his fellow Democruds, the party of Hypocrites. He is as responsible for continuing that war as are most of the US Congress. THERE CAN BE NO CHANGE IN U.S. GOVERNMENT UNTIL THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM IS ABOLISHED. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The two-party "democracy" we have is a complete FRAUD! Free and Fair Elections? Please explain how they are either "free" or "fair"! Iraq has a better democracy than we do! They have multi-party elections (at the insistence of Bush Jr). Sounds like Iraq is far more "progressive" than the U.S. Obama a "progressive candidate"? Are you F___ING JOKING? This guy is a turd on his very BEST day! Work to elect him? After his "historic" defeat in November, it is my fervent hope that he will subsequently lose his senate seat in the 2010 "elections", and he finds himself back on the street, organizing whatever it was he "organized" before. Loser!

    Eric | 2008-09-18 - 06:30:21 PM (CDT)
  16. "He wasn’t even IN the Senate then." I assume you aren’t, and weren’t, a Senator. So by your logic, you were supporting the Iraq War.

    Buggles | 2008-09-19 - 02:30:50 AM (CDT)
  17. Hey Buggles, check this: Google was to sponsor a debate here in New Orleans as an alternative to the corporate-sponsored Democratic/Republican-run debates (Commission on Presidential Debates.) Ray Nagin personally extended his invitation, for it was part of a revitalization effort for the area post-Katrina.

    Once it became apparent they were going to include Nader, Obama backed out. Poor Black people be damned. That is inexcusable.

    He also shined off Tavis Smiley’s Black Symposium two years in a row for rich big-wig events.

    Obama is a white-corporate sellout.

    Of course, you’ll just continue to close your eyes and ears and "hope" for "change"...

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-19 - 01:22:43 PM (CDT)
  18. "Obama is a white-corporate sellout." Nice racism.

    Buggles | 2008-09-19 - 01:45:11 PM (CDT)
  19. Boy you are buggin’, how is that racist? Because many black people are saying that, too.

    This is the part of me that wants Obama to win, so he can disappoint everybody.

    You are ignorant. I’m done with you.

    Nolan P. | 2008-09-20 - 05:05:54 PM (CDT)
Your Thoughts,
Name: (required)
To protect everyone from terrible spam, please enter the following code: (required)
captcha
* Offensive comments will be deleted!