Share

Truthout Interview With Ralph Nader: "Only the Rich Can Save Us"

by: Jason Leopold, t r u t h o u t | Video Interview

    Ralph Nader will always be remembered by his critics as the man whose bid for the White House in 2000 gave us eight years of George W. Bush. The disdain many liberals have for Nader still runs deep nearly a decade later.

    But there's no denying the positive impact his activism has had on this country over the past half-century. Without Ralph Nader there wouldn't be an Environmental Protection Agency, an Occupational Safety and Health Administration, a Consumer Product Safety Commission, a Safe Drinking Water Act and so on.

    Nader has also written scores of books, many of which spotlighted his crusade against corporate behemoths like General Motors and the two-party system he says has steered the country in the wrong direction. Simply put, Nader may be accused of being a "spoiler," but he's also a true believer.

    Recently, I sat down with Nader to discuss his latest doorstopper of a book, "Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us" a fictional account involving real-life public figures, including Warren Buffet, Ted Turner, Yoko Ono and Phil Donahue, who set off to start a progressive revolution using their enormous wealth.

    Although fictional, Nader does not refer to this highly readable tome as a novel. Rather, he describes it as a "practical utopia."

    "Historically, our country has benefited from 'practical utopias,' or utopian fiction" that "infused and gave vision to the progressive movement," Nader said in our wide-ranging interview. "But in the last 50 years or so, we just haven't done much practical utopian fiction."

    In addition to describing how the theme of his book can become reality, Nader also offered blistering analyses of President Obama's job performance thus far and the debate surrounding health care reform.

    Though I pointed out to Nader that the president has only been in office for eight months (at the time of this interview), he referred to Obama as a "concessionary politician" despite his short time in office.

    "He doesn't like conflict, he doesn't like taking on the corporate powers - he demonstrated that as senator of Illinois and senator in the US Senate. He is what might be called a concessionary personality, a harmony ideology," Nader said. "In Washington, you project that from the White House and the shark tank known as the Congress will eat you alive."

    Nader said Obama has "lost huge momentum" in his attempt to overhaul the health care industry, in part because "he's turned his back on liberals and progressives who elected him. He doesn't invite them, for the most part, to the White House, but he invites the CEOs of the drug companies, of the auto companies, of the banks, and he bails out these crooks on Wall Street."

    As for his political aspirations, Nader did not indicate whether he would mount another presidential bid. But he said he wanted to see "a major, historical, progressive convention convened to sort of elevate the whole progressive movement, with a thorough agenda of empowerment and substantive justice, and very substantial financial resources."

    "The progressive movement - if it's not demoralized, it's fractured," Nader said. "It doesn't have a sense of pride and identity for what its forebears delivered to the American people."

    Secondly, Nader said, "Maybe this book will stimulate some billionaires and mega-millionaires who are enlightened and of advanced age and have no axe to grind, who will come forward and take [on] their great cause."

    -----------

    For more information on "Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us," visit onlythesuperrich.org.

    To see more Truthout Videos check out our video page.

  

»


Jason Leopold is the Deputy Managing Editor at Truthout. He is the author of the Los Angeles Times bestseller, News Junkie, a memoir. Visit www.newsjunkiebook.com for a preview.

Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

Much as I admire Ralph

Much as I admire Ralph Nader, and have voted for him in the past, I don't expect the super-rich to save us. I don't expect anything from them except more greed and increasing their wealth on the backs of the rest of us. Instead of begging them for help, I'd rather burn down their mansions and their banks and their lobbyists and their Congress. I have gone from a law-abiding citizen to someone who constantly fantasizes about doing away with the multinational corporations that own and oppress us. And from reading many other web sites, both left and right, you'd be surprised at how many in this country share my outrage.

All the good he accomplished

All the good he accomplished has been gutted by the Republicans and the Dems in bed with the GOP. Believing the "Super Rich" will have to save our country is another of his fantasies--He has been successful and aiding the far right and as a result aided in the destruction of the environment, healthcare, safety and just about anything that can be tossed onto the funeral pyre of his good intentions. The rich don't care about anyone else but themselves and that has been proven time an again. He screwed the pooch for all of us.

The agencies mentioned in

The agencies mentioned in this article have had their funding attacked, have had their ranks thinned, and have been almost held entirely captive by the respective industries they were created to watch after. It's important to consider Ralph's latest work of *fiction* in the proper context, and "liberal" must be referring to the cult of Rubin, of which Hefty Gore was a member.

Luckily, there are also

Luckily, there are also super-rich of a more libertarian bent to cancel out the super-rich of the progressive bent. Or, better yet, why not encourage the super-rich to contribute their vast wealth to worthy causes rather than politics?

It's absolute nonsense to

It's absolute nonsense to blame Ralph Nader for the troubles of 2001-2009. If you want to blame a non-corporate candidate, how about blaming David McReynolds, a socialist candidate who polled about 800 votes in Florida, larger than the illegitimate 'administration's' margin of 'victory.' More to the point, the fact is that the election was stolen in the summer of 2000, when Governor Jeb and Katherine Harris paid a private firm $4 million to vet the voting rolls. About 90,000 voters were wrongly purged, overwhelmingly low income people of color. And we all know how that demographic tends to vote, don't we? Today the state of Florida admits to purging 50,000 voters---maybe in another ten years they'll finally come clean. Then the Supreme Court said, 'In the USA, we decide elections by not counting votes, especially when we can install a right wing extremist who actually lost.' And that was it. Nader is a convenient scapegoat for naked corruption but he had nothing to do with it.

Shame on you Jason Leopold!

Shame on you Jason Leopold! Ralph Nader didn't give us George Bush in 2000. Al Gore won the 2000 election. It was only because of Scalia's treasonous shenanigans, as well as other illegal acts committed by Jeb Bush and Kathryn Harris that the wing nut from Texas was ever able to steal the presidency. You, Jason Leopold should know this. Why on earth would you even suggest that Nader had a hand in Gore's loss?

It is the actions of the

It is the actions of the rich and the inactions of the not so rich that have gotten us into the current mess. While rich progressives may lead the way, the ultimate muscle of any progressive movement come when the not so rich (and frequently dirt poor) turn their inaction into action.

In the last election, many

In the last election, many of us bought the "don't be a spoiler" coolaid and voted the Dems into office. These corporate sell-outs are about to approve a bill that will FORCE Americans to purchase private health insurance at prices set by that industry, at a time when many have trouble paying for food and shelter. If that happens, many of us will be voting 3rd party in the next election. If that means a Republican win, so be it. The "spoilers" will be the Democrats, who took their majority and used it against the people who elected them.

The fascist right wing

The fascist right wing stealing the 2000 joke election, a passive Gore, a right wing supreme court, a fascist controlled media...that is what made mass murderers bush and cheney dictators for 8 years! Nader is a champion of what should be- but deluded amerika is no where near ready to be a peaceful compassionate nation ! tioche; Mexico

I get so tired of people

I get so tired of people mentioning Nader and the 2000 election as if the Democrats "deserved" the left-wing vote. Maybe they should instead do something to earn it? Obama has, unfortunately, turned out as I expected: just another in a long line of center-hugging do-nothings. I don't hold out any hope of the super-rich offering salvation, but it may be that they are the only ones with the ability to spend large chunks of cash on useful projects. It happened with the American library system in the 19th century, so it's not impossible...just unlikely.

A good rule of thumb, not a

A good rule of thumb, not a tome, but not dumb, is to kill the rich. Oh, but that won't happen, when you meet them, you will be so blinded by their shiny bling and things, you won't be able to see em.

Why do people assume that

Why do people assume that super rich Al Gore would have been better than Bush? Like Obama, Gore talks and fails to walk.

Unfortunately, I don't know

Unfortunately, I don't know of any ''populist'' billionaires. We have a government of, by and for the super-rich, bought and paid for by the big money profiteers. Occasionally, the Congress will throw the rest of us a bone. Get use to it -- it will never change until something catastrophic happens.

Years ago, many of the

Years ago, many of the wealthy felt a patriotic duty to help their country. Now many of them think of themselves as "citizens of the world." They can live anywhere, invest anywhere, shelter their income from taxes in many places. American citizenship has become a convenience for such people, who no longer fell any duty to do what is best for this country. The wealthy have the funds to purchase Congress to re-write laws to serve their own interests instead of the interests of this country as a whole, and that is what they have been doing for years. "Only the rich can save us?" I don't think so. Only an angry, and organised, populace can save this country.

I intend to vote for Nader

I intend to vote for Nader and his party in the future. I was always worried about "wasting" my vote with him or giving it to the GOP. No more. I am tired and disgusted with all the promises from all my democratic pols (Nelson, Wexler & Obama). They aren't doing squat to help people who need health care today and they aren't doing anything to control costs. This is all a bunch of BS just like the credit card reforms. Reforms must be implemented immediately, not 2013, or the industry will change their rules and policies and millions more will go without health care, die or go bankrupt.

Haven't read Nader's book,

Haven't read Nader's book, but I disagree with the automatic dismissal of the thesis that a few rich progressives, such as Soros [and, historically, FDR], who really do seem to see the tragedy unfolding around us, may provide some of the financing that a new progressive movement would need. Most progressives, of course, are NOT wealth; many of the former middle class are now struggling for survival. But we DO have the votes, and principles we believe in... and with a little help from our friends in high places, we might just be able to put together a viable political movement. The increasingly fascist right wing (and in this I include much of the current "Democratic" party, who vote with them) has NOTHING: their moral and ethical bankruptcy is alternately sad and funny--their house of cards is built on nothing but naked self-interest and greed--and the money to pay for expensive deceptions. Obama, I agree, has been a disappointment: whatever the reason, he has cozied up to the right, and negleted the voice of those he put in office, and refused to make the hard choices. Perhaps all this is raw material for a third party in 2012--the Democratic Party has demonstrated that it is too wedded to the power structure that is strangling democracy, and destroying the middle class that is its only hope!

Jason Leopold's picture
@bruce 20:34 Thanks for your

@bruce 20:34 Thanks for your comment. It was not "I" who said Nader stole the election from Bush, rather that statement was attributed to Nader's "critics" on the left. But your point is well taken.

Jason Leopold
Deputy Managing Editor
t r u t h o u t

If Al Gore had won his own

If Al Gore had won his own state of TN, he would of won the election, regardless of who took FL.

Gore refused to raise any

Gore refused to raise any issue, like the Clintons he took us for granted, {the working classes}. Gore lost on his own accord, what has he done since he lost the election? Made more money with his new environment Scam. Obama is leading the working classes into a movement to lose the next two or three elections. Most of us can see the writing on the wall in D.C. We have been fooled for the last time, Obama is making sure of that.

Apparently, Nader never

Apparently, Nader never reads Vanity Fair. Lock him up with a few issues, bread and water, strains of Chopin for a week in a closet in the Hamptons. I guarantee he'll recant. Maybe a little 'retail therapy' will help. ...some Manolos at $700/pair, a $1500 bottle of wine. . .Come on Ralph! I'm ralphing so hard I can't get up. Check their back issues. Probably got a photo of Ralph sharing a secret joke with an uberCapo and a starlet in there somewhere.

I don't know if the

I don't know if the super-rich can save us, but I'm pretty sure the almost-super-rich are ruining us. I'm with Nader regarding the sell-out by Obama. Today, once again, we have announcements of billions of dollars in bonuses for those who have done so much to impoverish millions of ordinary Americans and their children and children's children. At the very least: GEITHNER MUST GO! GEITHNER MUST GO! GEITHNER MUST GO!

If the American system

If the American system weren't so corrupted by money, and if Nader had the backing to be heard in the media, his message (always for the benefit of the people and true democracy) could be heard and he could have been elected and would have made the best president America ever had! What can we do? Share these ideas with the propagandized citizens who are dazzled by Obama and can't see past his smile and promises and help them realize that even if he wanted to make the kinds of changes he promised, he would soon be as dead as JFK if he tried to go against the established system which benefits the rich and screws the poor. If we want the revolution many here are pining for and deserve, we've got to go one on one and convince those not on board of the true state of affairs and with enough seeing clearly, they couldn't get away with the crap they continually foist on the public. Hooray for Ralph Nader!

Sharonsj - I join in the

Sharonsj - I join in the outrage. I have never been a violent person, never spanked my kids, but there is something so wrong and so black about the situation in America today that - well, I grew up in rural Colorado. Boyfriend was a rancher, I can shoot the ears off a slinking coyote that's stealing sheep or calves from quite a ways off.

Didn't vote for Nader, like

Didn't vote for Nader, like many of the things has done, disliked some, but for god sake the election was stolen by a republican cabal and thrown by the demarcates. I am as about left leaning as it gets and Jason Leopold has no right speaking for me.

The late U Utah Phillips

The late U Utah Phillips told the story of the early union gathering at the turn of the 29th century, where an ancient woman tottered up to the podium, demanded the megaphone, and said "I want every one of you Wobblies and Socialists to get a gun and go to the houses of the rich. And when they come out, shoot them." Stand On Zanzibar, the first radical enviro book, opens with a man sighting in on a corporate CEO as he leaves his polluting factory. Yet none of this has actually happened. I guess we're satisfied with what we have. With what they leave us.

I'm concerned with Obama's

I'm concerned with Obama's presidency for the same reasons observed by Nader in the article (I'm not watching the video because the editors haven't indicated how long it is -- could you please post that info.?). Those reasons, summarized, "harmony politics" and of course what we're witnessing in the health care "debate" -- which is not a debate, because it's too predictable and has been thus for some time now, for anyone honestly analyzing the outcome according to who funds Congress (as usual). I also agree with Ralph about the progressive movement lost self-regard. One can especially witness this on politically mixed forums whereby the right gain an upper hand, because the left are naive while the right know how to work together together tightly and never give an inch on the personal level. The left forever "want to be friends" or have all these illusions about turning the other cheek and actually changing someone's mind -- when it has nothing to do with their mind being changed -- it all boils down, with the right, to pocketbooks and unabashed, unashamed self-interest at the expense of whoever gets in the way.

If this is what the rich can

If this is what the rich can do for us, I don't think we should hold our breath: http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2009/10/gates-gives-300-million-but-with-catch.html Summary: Gates foundation spends money to help African farmers...switch to patented (GM) seeds.

John Kennedy donated his

John Kennedy donated his salary, I think Obama should set an example and donate some if not all of his salary and challenge the rich congressional members to do the same. Why not have them setup Green Companies to employ people to put solar and wind solutions for middle and low income people. Maybe setup their own bank to refinance these mortgages at good rates and small profits...I'd certainly put my money there. Bank of America is giving me a .99999% return on my CDs. They are making record profits and this is what I get? I don't want them to use my money. After his presidency Obama will make lots of money. I voted for him and I believe in him and think this would be a good thing to do...maybe the super rich would follow suit. Don't they, corporations, know that if we cannot buy their goods that they will not continue to make profits...we are in this together and we can have layered incomes and profits, but the gap between the haves and have nots has gotten way to big to survive. Come on folks let's win together not fail to greed.

I interacted with Nader,

I interacted with Nader, when he sent to meet me his head of Public Citizen Joan Claybrook. Somehow she had heard of my studies on Pesticides, Herbicides and the dangers thereof. She had been Jimmy Carter's auto Czar. I was singularly unimpressed with her one track mind at that time. She ignored my proposal to destroy the cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's chief suspect by pressing legal statutes in each congressional district. Now we have millions dying of diseases caused by pesticides/herbicides. For all the good Nader has done his Run against Gore was simply a means of gaining the matching funds for his organization. I listened to the interview and found him to be correct about Obama and I have written about Obama in the same vein.

:Facism Lite' is what we

:Facism Lite' is what we have, and the big international money calls the shots. Nader made it clear in his first statement, and it should be obvious to anyone who has examined the 911 attacks. Saudi big money got those who aided and abetted the attacks (Omar al Bayoumi and Osama Basnana, Haifa Bandar, etc.) off without being inconvenienced in any way. Our patriotic politicians gladly accepted the payoff and followed orders, flying the Saudis home within 24 hours of the attacks. The liberals who want to blame Nader for 8 years of Bush are fooling themselves. If they want to see who is responsible for our steady descent into fascism, they should look in a mirror.

The rich aren't going to

The rich aren't going to help anyone except themselves, unless the government returns the money they have stolen from the people to the people. And we aren't going to do that because the rich run, if not own, the government, as well as everything else. Ironically, the American people worship the rich and cherish this reverse Robin Hood society of ours. They cheer when somebody wins a super lottery, even though they haven't earned a dime of it. And no one ever challenges the idea that what people "earn" is through their efforts, and their efforts alone. No one appreciates the fact that without the civilization that billions have built, these mega "earners" would have nothing. Whisk all the CEOs away in some vast Rapture and there would be virtually no impact on the economy. All would be replaced overnight, and the companies would move on. But remove all the workers, and civilization would collapse. Yet these CEOs consider themselves and pay themselves as if they single-handedly have created all the wealth of our society. They are just not worth what we let them pay themselves, but we don't see that because they have succeeded in brainwashing us. Sure, there comes a time when the mega-rich decide they have to do something for their legacies, and they set up charitable trusts and foundations to accomplish this task, but this is a drop in the bucket. What we have to understand is that they never earned their fortunes in the first place.

I voted for Nader in 2000

I voted for Nader in 2000 and, unlike many Democrats who regretted it, am still totally unrepentant. You have to be an idiot to believe that he gave us Bush's presidency--that was stolen, look at the facts. Furthermore, what makes the diehard Democrats believe that Gore would have been so much better a president. He was in the pockets of the same lobbyists and rich Republicans as Bush. The Democratic Party pushed us progressives into a corner and told us we had nowhere else to go but to them, well what made them think we were so spineless that we had to cave. As for whether super rich progressives can get us the legislation passed on health care, the war, and the environment, Nader has a point. Franklin Roosevelt succeeded because he was rich enough that he couldn't be bought.

Although I agree with Ralph

Although I agree with Ralph that solutions to our most serious problems as a nation are blocked by corporate influence, I suspect that the main value of his new book is to get us all to start thinking about new ways to influence government, bypassing the two party system. The interview was good, but the technical quality of the sound was so poor, I could hardly follow some of it. Another person on a different computer (both Macs) said the same thing.

To the person who said he

To the person who said he intended to vote for Nader and his party: The problem is that Nader doesn't believe in forming a new political party. He ran as a Green in 1996 and 2000, but those were endorsements. When we had a nomination process in 2004, he refused to be involved because he won't register for any political party. Something about a promise he made to his dying father. So is 2004 and 2008 he ran as an independent. The $6 million he spent in 2008 built nothing. The money would have done a lot to build the Green Party. Please consider supporting the Green Party by registering Green, giving money to the party, which accepts no corporate contributions, and getting involved.

Most people who dismiss

Most people who dismiss Nader never really listened to him speak. I was among the people who were really p. at him in 2000. Then I went to a meeting he held in Seattle and listend to him speak for more than an hour. Besides a few points that seem a little far fetch, he is the only one who makes sense and tells it the way it is. All politicians are hypocrites!

Folks think Gore a better

Folks think Gore a better choice than Bush in 2000 because they do not believe Gore would have launched Afghan/Iraq wars. Period. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers--to summarize my thought via book title--was immeasurably and irreversibly [because Obama is continuing Afghan war] accelerated by the decision to respond to 9/11 with these wars. Congress, White House, Supreme Court, political parties, corporate power brokers, citizens--none seems to realize it now, but with the continuation of all present policies, the course Cheney/Bush charted will inevitably come to pass, probably sooner than 100 years hence. After all, the Romans didn't realize their supremacy was in decline for a long time. Our continuing financial choices should be enough to convince anyone of the actuality of this decline. In the meantime, all US citizens will be choosing whether to have a peaceful, egalitarian post-domination society like the Dutch (a past World Power)[with universal health care] or a suspicious, brutal society like Russia appears to be creating for itself. All that remains to individuals is to see the situation clearly and make conscious choices of the highest caliber in both the apparently material and the apparently non-material realms. Ralph Nader continues to put forth his ideas for choices fellow citizens can make for the good of all. It is up to us to evaluate all suggestions and support all humanity-embracing ideas we can wrap our minds and energy around. For better or for worse, we are creating our post-world- domination society as we speak.

As a Canadian I was taken

As a Canadian I was taken aback when Nader lumped Tommy Douglas in with these progressive billionaires. Douglas was never a billionaire! I always got the impression he wasn't even very rich. The party Douglas helped found, by the way, that morphed into the New Democratic Party here in Canada, does exactly the concessionary things Nader describes Obama as doing. They too, make the assumption that the left-wing vote has nowhere else to go--so far that hasn't worked for them the way it did for Obama, but I believe they have a compulsion to follow their American counterparts regardless.

Thank you Jason Leopold for

Thank you Jason Leopold for your explanation. I've read your work and have typically been impressed. Though in this article it wasn’t clear what you thought in regard to the 2000 election, the opening clearly suggested once again that Ralph Nader gave us a Bush white house. Myself, as well as many progressives view the 2000 election as a tumultuous event that marked the end of the democratic experiment. The crimes that were committed in order to rig the 2000 election are without precedent in this country, and to this day have never been seriously investigated by any US authoritative body. Thanks to pathetically inadequate and incompetent reporting by the major news services, your average American has no understanding of this. Until we recognize the 2000 election for what it was, theft of the highest order, we will never be able to deal properly with any of the problems from which this country suffers . Those that would blame American heroes like Ralph Nader in no way furthers this end. Thank you again.

Jason Leopold's picture
@Bruce 00:30, thank you! I

@Bruce 00:30, thank you! I appreciate your comments and feedback and I encourage you to continue to express them here. As a reporter/editor, I keep my own personal opinion out of the story/interview. In terms of Nader and the 2000 election, you may find this new study interesting. It suggests that Nader actually HELPED Gore. So there you go. I just found it myself. Here is the link http://media-newswire.com/release_1100525.html

I didn't vote for Ralph

I didn't vote for Ralph exactly because I was concerned that the election was too close and there was too much at stake with George W. Bush as a candidate. I remember a deep feeling of dread about seeing GW in office, and as a result, deciding to go with Gore and not Nader (though I liked Gore anyway, it wasn't the key factor). But still, I felt mad during that period as the elections got everyone pumped up, but once it was over and the dust settled ... I've never held Gore's loss against Nader. He was just scapegoated by the Democrats .. it also makes sense that he could have brought more attention and interest in the election from people who voted for Gore and might have stayed home.

I enjoyed this interview on

I enjoyed this interview on Ralph Nader. I am reading his latest book right now, it is very interesting read and enjoying it. It really is a good way to pass some time and be stimulated, and it is huge!! I also thought this Ralph Nader was simply awesome and so dead on in this interview with his answers/responses from Mr. Leopold. . . why aren't more people listening/watching this? Seriously. . . this should be on TVs, radios, on mass media everywhere Thank you for this interview and Ralph Nader has every right to have run in 2000 and I just hope he does it again---I am going to donate $$ and campaign for him.

I think the interview is

I think the interview is about 15 minutes. I agree, youtube shows the time for the recording. If the software doesn't, could the editor please post for those of us on very tight schedules? Not just this video, but everywhere on truthout? Thanx. Will come back when I have more time. Ralph, we love you.

I still cannot understand

I still cannot understand what happened during those final weeks before the election of 2000, why Gore was unable to convince Nader, in the best interest of the country, to join him, and usher in a new era for the American people. What a great team they would have been. Fantasies are a remarkable thing and both these great men missed a golden opportunity to save us from the present corporate takeover of our democracy. What a "fictional account of real life figures" that would have been... the book to write and right.

Nader certainly offered

Nader certainly offered alternative perspective and tried to raise the level of discourse/debate to a meaningful level, he is also a flawed candidate. lest folks forget, he too is rich. I apologize for lack of citation, but I recall an interview where he was asked about certain stock holdings that included companies who were rated poorly on environmental and labor issues. He claimed not to be aware and asked for the names of the companies. He was pressed more by the reporter, noting that an activist should be aware of his investments. Nader responded that if the reporter would name them , he would look into it.

Some first thoughts... On

Some first thoughts... On 2000 Election results: SCOTUS should have been impeached. (STILL SHOULD) Morning of 9/11; "What took them so long (chickens coming home to roost, etc)" "Geeze, dreading in revusion what US will do in response (maybe good thing Gore is not prez just now, he may do the same, see above)." On 2008 Race: When Obama looked like serious contender, decided to NOT vote for him. Resoning if he were truely the change/reformer we wanted him to be, he would surely be assassinated. You could say I helped save his life. (don't have to thank me) Others: Clinton should have been impeached, but not for blowjobs. Born in 1933,a lifelong left-dem, listened to all the lies big Ds fed us even while administrations abused public/workers (who is NOT a worker?) while KNOWING there HAD to be better ways, until started looking for some. Until the collective WE get off our asses and join in with the worlds peoples and dump this murderous and destructive system and build one compatible wite life, we've had it. In my time I've walked more than half the world and confirming what I always knew, all desire and need the very same peace and justice as ourselves. Nader's book is a gem, first thought by page 150, send copy to Warren Buffet w/ note: WHY NOT, Warren???" "What have you got to loose"? ~John L.

I do not believe that Ralph

I do not believe that Ralph Nader caused the win of George Bush. The Democratic party left many people around the country unregistered to vote. They did not present a strong case. The bank modernization passed on their watch and in the end they tried to be as dumb as the dumb guy.

I empathize with the anger

I empathize with the anger and doubt. However the power is only theirs (in the hands of the super rich) if we participate and enable that archaic system that they exploited! Think about generating the next system- one based on the economic, environmental and social justice attributes of sustainability. Then go for it. Darwin (separatism, fear for survival) has been downsized as quantum physics and string theory allow us to realize the truer nature of our whole and connected reality. It makes more sense to use our thoughts, energy and money toward what we want to happen and not waste it paying attention to that which we don't want. Tis a matter of energy after all!

Nader's Ego and Our

Nader's Ego and Our Choices Believe what you want about the reasons we got George W. Bush but one fact that can't be denied is: Had Ralph Nader's giant ego - and need to be in front of a TV camera - kept him from siphoning off votes from Gore, Gore WOULD have won. And for all of you who continue to believe that you can have American politics conform to your ideals, sorry but there is a harsh reality. One of two candidates is going to win. You are going to choose which you think is better for the country. And that is the ONLY choice you have. This is called reality. Its like gravity. You can believe it or not but the result is the same. Don't like Obama? Would you prefer Sarah Palin? And for all the "Nadarites" and "Greens" out there, do you REALLY believe Gore would have taken us into Iraq or shredded the constitution?

Look at California's Guv if

Look at California's Guv if you believe that "FDR succeeded because he was rich enough that he couldn't be bought" (Thurs. 15:23). That is what Governator A.S. said when he was running for Governor after Gray Davis was removed from office. His half-billion dollar wealth did not stop him from: a) accelerated fund-raising from rich CEOs, b) bankrupting the state (with his staunch position of no new taxes), and c) "blowing up the boxes", aka shrink the government and remove the security nets for middle and lower classes. He lives in LA and flies in his jet to Sacramento while pretending to be interested in the environment.

There's good cause for all

There's good cause for all who are disappointed in Obama. One of the best statements of who he really is comes in this short youtube clip by Australian journalist, John Pilger: http://www.youtube.com/wakeymedia2 Anyone with half a brain who watches this, then compares what Obama says with what he does, will come to the right conclusion. I believe this supports Nader's ideas. As for the rich coming to save us, I think it's a pipe dream--they live in their own world that is so far removed from the reality of life for the average person, they don't have a clue.

Save us from what?

Save us from what?

Excellent interview...But

Excellent interview...But with all respect, Ralph's ego get's in the way of, rather than contributing to, positive and progressive change in my humble opinion. It seems to me that change happens when society awakens and increasingly is aware, educated and ready for change. Ralph, you'll note, was quick to accept credit for the Consumer Products Safety, EPA etc. and so much more. I'd like folks to consider the possibility that society was ready for the change of that time in history and that it was going to come about with or without Ralph.....He would be so much easier to give some credit to if his answer was "I guess I contributed to that period of progressive change..." rather than grab the credit for their comming about. Then and now I'd suggest that it is likely that the egotist who grabs an emerging idea and tries to promote as his own, slows down the rate of positive change rather than accelerate it....this may occur as, for example, billionaires who may have been inspired by the recent movement for progressive taxation in Germany suddenly finding their inclination diminished by the fear that Nader would take credit... I support most of what he says, but he's not the only one saying these things.

Yeah, God forbid this guy

Yeah, God forbid this guy should take credit for anything...he's only been written off ludicrously by how many people as the guy personally responsible for the ills of the Bush administration. Still I actually think you're confusing principles and actual ideals with self promotion and ego which has run rampant lately obviously. Understandable... I do think however what's actually being proposed here and quite possibly elsewhere is counter to that mentality. The title of the book is "Only the super rich can save us" not "Ralph Nader saves the world" after all. Essentially what your seeing in my humble opinion is a guy who cares deeply, took a pounding and is brave enough to reach out and say hey look we need some help here. Pipe dream?... maybe... but it seems pretty egoless and honarable to me. I haven't read the book yet but I bet you it's really good too...

For all he has done, it is a

For all he has done, it is a different story when it directly involves him. Should have asked about his union busting when his employees tried to organize. He did everything in his power to prevent that from happening. In his case, what is good for the goose is NOT good for the gander. He would preach how good unions were but when it came time for his workers he said a resounding NO.

I believe in single payer

I believe in single payer and other things Nader suggests and his analysis is very penetrating. However, he speaks with the experience of a life-long advocate who can bare his knuckles as his conscience sees fit. I wish Obama did it more often - especially in front of Joseph Lieberman - but it's important to realize Nader has little experience in the 'representative' part of representative democracy. Obama represents the interest of a huge circle of people. Ralph represents his own sense of truth. His analysis should take that into account.