AMY GOODMAN: Obama later appeared to backtrack on his comments about the future status of Jerusalem as capital in a follow-up interview on CNN. He said it would be up to the Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate. Ralph Nader?
RALPH NADER: Well, I think Barack Obama is in training to become panderer-in-chief. That was really a disgraceful speech. It didn’t further the peace process, the two-state solution favored by a majority of Jewish Americans, Arab Americans, a majority of Israeli and Palestinian people. He basically sided with the militaristic approach to occupying, repressing, colonizing, destroying the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza. He hasn’t even spoken out against the international crime of the blockade of Gaza, one-and-a-half million people, from medicine or drinking water, fuel, electricity, food—lots of silent fatalities in Gaza because of that.
Barack Obama really now has to be examined very carefully. He has worn out the word “change.” We now want to know what change is involved. And it’s quite clear that he is a corporate candidate from A to Z. In his voting record, he voted against reform of the Mining Act of 1872, which gives away our hard rock minerals. He voted for a terrible class-action restriction law that the corporations wanted him to vote for. He, in many ways, has disappointed people who had greater hopes for him. He’s voted for reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. He refuses to even discuss—he’s vigorously against impeachment of Bush and Cheney. He won’t even support his colleague Senator Russ Feingold motion to censure the Bush administration for systemic repeated illegal wiretaps. He—you know, he’s letting the corporate-dominated city of Washington, the corporations who actually rule us now in Washington, determine his agenda. And that does not augur well.
He’s just appointed economic advisers right out of the Robert Rubin school of Citigroup and the University of Chicago. His Middle East advisers involve people who actually helped write his AIPAC speech. You know, it’s a sad thing to see, because he knows better, but he’s suppressing himself repeatedly until he becomes a different person, should he be elected president
ZennButtKicker (tlhwraith)
· 1 year ago
Nader can go find the nearest bridge and jump off it. Ask yourself one simply question, do you really think Nader could do anything in the current political climate if by some astronomical chance he did win POTUS? Honestly, Nader talks a good game because he's got nothing to lose and he knows their isn't a snowballs chance in hell he's going to win. I say if Nader wants to impress me, let him run for lower office then actually have to SERVE as an elected official. Instead, he's just another blowhard talking head who's got no dog in the fight and is free to criticize everyone on everything.
pfft!
debbsmith
· 1 year ago
You're attacking Nadar while ignoring the excellent points he made about Obama. Senator Obama sounds more and more like an old-school pol shilling for the corporations.
dula
· 1 year ago
Obama was the best Dem choice...doesn't mean he can't be bought. People change when they think the POTUS position is within reach...look what happened to Hillary. I just read on Huff Post that Obama will consider Bush's Defense Secretary as part of his Cabinet...That in combo with his choice in economic advisors (corporate bankers) is something to be concerned about.
dad
· 1 year ago
largely on the success he achieved in raising money over the Internet.
the public is financing his campaign
BarrieT
· 1 year ago
Yes, voluntarily - and on a spectacular scale.
lovepeaceandallthat
· 1 year ago
And isn't Obama's refusal to participate in the currently accepted campaign finance system a signal that he supports campaign finance reform? Such reform has been called for for decades now, and many people feel that without campaign finance reform no other reforms are ever going to happen. We have to unleash the politicians from the corporations, special interests, and big moneyholders in this country (and the world).
So yeah the public is financing Obama.... but in a fundementally different way. No one can give more than 2,300 dollars for the general election. And everyone is encouraged to give what they can afford, even if it is $5 or $25. I think this is a tremendous step forward. Historical.
blackwolf
· 1 year ago
I like his Obama's thinking. It means he'll be responsible to the people, and not special interest groups.
vwcat
· 1 year ago
McCain is having a fit over this. That is because he knows Obama will be rolling in money from us the people Just like the townhalls went bust in his attempt to cash in on the crowds that come to see Obama. McCain thought if he could do townhalls with him then he could actually get a full house and them some with the attraction of Obama. Seems McCain needs what Obama gets: money, crowds and a real campaign and organization.
moreleesafer
· 1 year ago
McCain wants to be cool, black, have a wife not made of plastic.....
jr
· 1 year ago
"we can have a bake sale with the cookies from the Hershey's recipe Cindy stole"-McCombover
All Comments
Time to advance another $25 to the campaign.
Obama's against retroactive immunity, aka the Protect AT&T Act:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/feb/12/...
RALPH NADER: Well, I think Barack Obama is in training to become panderer-in-chief. That was really a disgraceful speech. It didn’t further the peace process, the two-state solution favored by a majority of Jewish Americans, Arab Americans, a majority of Israeli and Palestinian people. He basically sided with the militaristic approach to occupying, repressing, colonizing, destroying the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza. He hasn’t even spoken out against the international crime of the blockade of Gaza, one-and-a-half million people, from medicine or drinking water, fuel, electricity, food—lots of silent fatalities in Gaza because of that.
Barack Obama really now has to be examined very carefully. He has worn out the word “change.” We now want to know what change is involved. And it’s quite clear that he is a corporate candidate from A to Z. In his voting record, he voted against reform of the Mining Act of 1872, which gives away our hard rock minerals. He voted for a terrible class-action restriction law that the corporations wanted him to vote for. He, in many ways, has disappointed people who had greater hopes for him. He’s voted for reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. He refuses to even discuss—he’s vigorously against impeachment of Bush and Cheney. He won’t even support his colleague Senator Russ Feingold motion to censure the Bush administration for systemic repeated illegal wiretaps. He—you know, he’s letting the corporate-dominated city of Washington, the corporations who actually rule us now in Washington, determine his agenda. And that does not augur well.
He’s just appointed economic advisers right out of the Robert Rubin school of Citigroup and the University of Chicago. His Middle East advisers involve people who actually helped write his AIPAC speech. You know, it’s a sad thing to see, because he knows better, but he’s suppressing himself repeatedly until he becomes a different person, should he be elected president
pfft!
the public is financing his campaign
So yeah the public is financing Obama.... but in a fundementally different way. No one can give more than 2,300 dollars for the general election. And everyone is encouraged to give what they can afford, even if it is $5 or $25. I think this is a tremendous step forward. Historical.
Seems McCain needs what Obama gets: money, crowds and a real campaign and organization.