||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CHRIS MATTHEWS WITH RALPH NADER
MATTHEWS: You are a man of the progressive spectrum. Is there anybody
in this campaign you like the looks of that can win, so that you
wouldn't. . .
NADER: Well. . .
MATTHEWS: Like, for example - let me run through them - do you like
Barack Obama? Do you like John Edwards? I assume you like some things
about Kucinich. But about those two front-running candidates, could you
support either one of those guys?
NADER: I do like Kucinich. But the front-runners, Edwards now has the
most progressive message across a broad spectrum of corporate power
damaging the interests of workers, consumers, taxpayers, of any
candidate I have - leading candidate - I have seen in years.
MATTHEWS: Well, he is with you, I mean, very pro-labor, wants labor
reform, wants to get rid of Taft-Hartley, a lot of things, very much for
the progressive line. What problem would you have with this guy at this
point? Any?
NADER: Well, let's see if he wins. The key phrase is when he says he
doesn't want to replace a corporate Republican with a corporate
Democrat.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
NADER: That's very key. I mean, he raises the issue of the
concentration of power and wealth in a few hands that are working
against the interests of the vast majority of American people. The
data, the documents are overwhelming in that respect. . .
MATTHEWS: When you say corporate reform, or you say you don't like the
way the corporations dominate American life, politically, socially,
economically, what is your main argument?
NADER: The main argument is what 72 percent of the American people told
Newsweek - Business Week, rather, in 2000: that corporations have too
much control over their lives. That means they have control over their
jobs. They can ship them abroad. They can give 47 million workers a
non-living wage, one of every three workers. They can block any kind of
health care of all Americans, which results in thousands of deaths every
year who can't afford health care, according to the Institute of
Medicine. They can distort the public budget, huge military
expenditures, half of the operating budget.
MATTHEWS: So, what is the alternative to corporate power?
NADER: Sovereignty of the people. It's people taking back their
government. It's people cleaning up campaign corruption, making sure
the votes are counted, putting public funding for public campaigns. It's
empowering workers to form more unions. It's controlling Congress, 535
people, who put their shoes on every day, like you and me. They're out
of control, the majority. The Democrats have been caving in the last
few months, again, on energy, on the war, on the food farm bill, on
civil liberties. You can't make a long enough list. . .
MATTHEWS: Is it possible that Ralph Nader will be part of the Democratic
coalition come next summer, that it's possible that the nominee is
Barack Obama, for example? Is there a plausibility that you will be out
there endorsing him come next November, if he were the nominee?
NADER: No. . .
MATTHEWS: Barack?
NADER: Because he doesn't have the agenda. If Edwards wins, if he wins
the whole nomination, and he doesn't back off, as they do when they win
the nomination. . .
MATTHEWS: I am amazed that you have now excluded Barack Obama from the
progressive coalition.
NADER: He has excluded himself by the statements he has made,
unfortunately. He is a lot smarter than his public statements, which
are extremely conciliatory to concentrated power and big business.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22302093#22302093
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OBAMA VOTED 'PRESENT' 130 TIMES IN ILLINOIS STATE SENATE
NY TIMES - In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the
Illinois legislature - to support a bill that would let some
juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from
African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a
tough-on-crime moderate. In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for
nor against the bill. He voted "present," effectively sidestepping the
issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.
Sometimes the "present" votes were in line with instructions from
Democratic leaders or because he objected to provisions in bills that he
might otherwise support. At other times, Mr. Obama voted present on
questions that had overwhelming bipartisan support. In at least a few
cases, the issue was politically sensitive.
The record has become an issue on the presidential campaign trail, as
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, his chief rival for the
Democratic nomination, has seized on the present votes he cast on a
series of anti-abortion bills to portray Mr. Obama as a "talker" rather
than a "doer."
Although a present vote is not unusual in Illinois, Mr. Obama's use of
it is being raised as he tries to distinguish himself as a leader who
will take on the tough issues, even if it means telling people the "hard
truths" they do not want to hear.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EDWARDS DENIES SEX ALLEGATIONS
POLITICS 1 - John Edwards' strongly denied the sex scandal allegation
published Wednesday on the cover of the National Enquirer as "absolute
nonsense." The story claims Edwards impregnated a campaign staffer,
Rielle Hunter, who is now six-months pregnant. Hunter denied the story
in a written statement, saying that "this has no relationship to nor
does it involve John Edwards in any way. Andrew Young is the father of
my unborn child." Andrew Young, who served as Edwards' North Carolina
Finance Director, also issued a statement saying that he is the father.
Young recently quit the campaign staff.
http://www.politics1.com/index.htm
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CHRIS MATTHEWS WITH RALPH NADER
MATTHEWS: You are a man of the progressive spectrum. Is there anybody
in this campaign you like the looks of that can win, so that you
wouldn't. . .
NADER: Well. . .
MATTHEWS: Like, for example - let me run through them - do you like
Barack Obama? Do you like John Edwards? I assume you like some things
about Kucinich. But about those two front-running candidates, could you
support either one of those guys?
NADER: I do like Kucinich. But the front-runners, Edwards now has the
most progressive message across a broad spectrum of corporate power
damaging the interests of workers, consumers, taxpayers, of any
candidate I have - leading candidate - I have seen in years.
MATTHEWS: Well, he is with you, I mean, very pro-labor, wants labor
reform, wants to get rid of Taft-Hartley, a lot of things, very much for
the progressive line. What problem would you have with this guy at this
point? Any?
NADER: Well, let's see if he wins. The key phrase is when he says he
doesn't want to replace a corporate Republican with a corporate
Democrat.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
NADER: That's very key. I mean, he raises the issue of the
concentration of power and wealth in a few hands that are working
against the interests of the vast majority of American people. The
data, the documents are overwhelming in that respect. . .
MATTHEWS: When you say corporate reform, or you say you don't like the
way the corporations dominate American life, politically, socially,
economically, what is your main argument?
NADER: The main argument is what 72 percent of the American people told
Newsweek - Business Week, rather, in 2000: that corporations have too
much control over their lives. That means they have control over their
jobs. They can ship them abroad. They can give 47 million workers a
non-living wage, one of every three workers. They can block any kind of
health care of all Americans, which results in thousands of deaths every
year who can't afford health care, according to the Institute of
Medicine. They can distort the public budget, huge military
expenditures, half of the operating budget.
MATTHEWS: So, what is the alternative to corporate power?
NADER: Sovereignty of the people. It's people taking back their
government. It's people cleaning up campaign corruption, making sure
the votes are counted, putting public funding for public campaigns. It's
empowering workers to form more unions. It's controlling Congress, 535
people, who put their shoes on every day, like you and me. They're out
of control, the majority. The Democrats have been caving in the last
few months, again, on energy, on the war, on the food farm bill, on
civil liberties. You can't make a long enough list. . .
MATTHEWS: Is it possible that Ralph Nader will be part of the Democratic
coalition come next summer, that it's possible that the nominee is
Barack Obama, for example? Is there a plausibility that you will be out
there endorsing him come next November, if he were the nominee?
NADER: No. . .
MATTHEWS: Barack?
NADER: Because he doesn't have the agenda. If Edwards wins, if he wins
the whole nomination, and he doesn't back off, as they do when they win
the nomination. . .
MATTHEWS: I am amazed that you have now excluded Barack Obama from the
progressive coalition.
NADER: He has excluded himself by the statements he has made,
unfortunately. He is a lot smarter than his public statements, which
are extremely conciliatory to concentrated power and big business.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22302093#22302093
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OBAMA VOTED 'PRESENT' 130 TIMES IN ILLINOIS STATE SENATE
NY TIMES - In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the
Illinois legislature - to support a bill that would let some
juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from
African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a
tough-on-crime moderate. In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for
nor against the bill. He voted "present," effectively sidestepping the
issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.
Sometimes the "present" votes were in line with instructions from
Democratic leaders or because he objected to provisions in bills that he
might otherwise support. At other times, Mr. Obama voted present on
questions that had overwhelming bipartisan support. In at least a few
cases, the issue was politically sensitive.
The record has become an issue on the presidential campaign trail, as
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, his chief rival for the
Democratic nomination, has seized on the present votes he cast on a
series of anti-abortion bills to portray Mr. Obama as a "talker" rather
than a "doer."
Although a present vote is not unusual in Illinois, Mr. Obama's use of
it is being raised as he tries to distinguish himself as a leader who
will take on the tough issues, even if it means telling people the "hard
truths" they do not want to hear.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EDWARDS DENIES SEX ALLEGATIONS
POLITICS 1 - John Edwards' strongly denied the sex scandal allegation
published Wednesday on the cover of the National Enquirer as "absolute
nonsense." The story claims Edwards impregnated a campaign staffer,
Rielle Hunter, who is now six-months pregnant. Hunter denied the story
in a written statement, saying that "this has no relationship to nor
does it involve John Edwards in any way. Andrew Young is the father of
my unborn child." Andrew Young, who served as Edwards' North Carolina
Finance Director, also issued a statement saying that he is the father.
Young recently quit the campaign staff.
http://www.politics1.com/index.htm
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No comments:
Post a Comment