Skip navigation
sponsored by 

'Meet the Press' transcript for Feb. 24, 2008


< Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >
  Broadcast videos, highlights
  Netcast
Feb. 24: Ralph Nader sits down with Tim Russert for an exclusive interview. Plus, a political roundtable with insights and analysis on Clinton vs. Obama and McCain vs. the New York Times -- featuring David Brooks, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Michele Norris and Chuck Todd.

Slide show
  60 years of ‘Meet the Press’
A photographic look back at the longest-running program in television history and the guests who graced the broadcast – from Martin Luther King Jr. to Jimmy Hoffa.

more photos

MR. RUSSERT:  Barack Obama was asked about your announcement...

MR. NADER:  Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT:  ...which you're going to--just made this morning on MEET THE PRESS and yesterday.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement

MR. NADER:  Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT:  This is what Obama had to say.  Let's watch.

(Videotape)

SEN. OBAMA:  He had called me, and I think reached out to my campaign--it--my sense is that Mr. Nader is somebody who, if you don't listen and adopt all of his policies, things are not substantive.  He seems to have a, a pretty high opinion of, of his, his own work.  In many ways, he is a heroic figure, and I don't mean to diminish him.  But I do think there's a sense now that, you know, if, if somebody's not hewing to the Ralph Nader agenda, then you, you must be lacking in some way.

(End videotape)

MR. NADER:  Well, first of all, compare my Web site, votenader.org, and all the issues that Mr. Obama and Senator Clinton and Mr. McCain are not addressing that are supported by a majority of the American people.  A majority of the American people support these issues.  They want foreign and military policy not to just be an aggressive military situation.

But Senator Obama is a person of substance.  He's also the first liberal evangelist in a long time.  He's run a brilliant tactical campaign.  But his better instincts and his knowledge have been censored by himself.  And I give you the example, the Palestinian-Israeli issue, which is a real off the table issue for the candidates.  So don't touch that, even though it's central to our security and to, to the situation in the Middle East.  He was pro-Palestinian when he was in Illinois before he ran for the state Senate, during he ran--during the state Senate.  Now he's, he's supporting the Israeli destruction of the tiny section called Gaza with a million and a half people. He doesn't have any sympathy for a civilian death ratio of about 300-to-1; 300 Palestinians to one Israeli.  He's not taking a leadership position in supporting the Israeli peace movement, which represents former Cabinet ministers, people in the Knesset, former generals, former security officials, in addition to mayors and leading intellectuals.  One would think he would at least say, "Let's have a hearing for the Israeli peace movement in the Congress," so we don't just have a monotone support of the Israeli government's attitude toward the Palestinians and their illegal occupation of Palestine.

MR. RUSSERT:  But would you prefer, as an American citizen, to have Barack Obama or John McCain as president?

MR. NADER:  What I prefer as an American citizen?

MR. RUSSERT:  Yes.

MR. NADER:  You're asking me?  I'm running for president, for heaven's sake.

MR. RUSSERT:  But as a citizen.

MR. NADER:  I would prefer that the American people organize, that whoever is in president--is president, they give that person backbone.

MR. RUSSERT:  How would you feel, however, if Ralph Nader's presence on the ballot tilted Florida or Ohio to John McCain and McCain became president, and Barack Obama, the first African-American who had been nominated by the Democratic Party--this is hypothetical--did not become a president and people turned to you and said, "Nader, you've done it again"?

MR. NADER:  Not a chance.  If the Democrats can't landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up, close down, emerge in a different form. You think the American people are going to vote for a pro-war John McCain who almost gives an indication that he's the candidate of perpetual war, perpetual intervention overseas?  You think they're going to vote for a Republican like McCain, who allies himself with the criminal, recidivistic regime of George Bush and Dick Cheney, the most multipliable impeachable presidency in American history?  Many leading members of the bar, including the former head of the American Bar Association, Michael Greco, absolutely dismayed over the violations of the Constitution, our federal laws, the criminal, illegal war in Iraq and the occupation?  There's no way.  That's why we have to take this opportunity to have a much broader debate on the issues that relate to the American people, as, as, as a fellow in Long Island said recently, Mr. Sloane, he said, "These parties aren't speaking to me.  They're not speaking to my problems, to my family's problems."

MR. RUSSERT:  But you do see differences between Barack Obama and John McCain on the war, on tax cuts, on the environment, on a lot of issues?

MR. NADER:  Yeah.  There are differences, obviously.  The question is not whether their differences verbally or what they put on their Web site, the question is what is their record?  Senator Obama's record has not been a challenging one.  He's not been a Senator Wellstone or Senator Abourezk or Senator Metzenbaum by any means.  He has leaned, if anything, more toward the pro-corporate side of, of policymaking.  The issue is, do they have the moral courage?  Do they have the fortitude to stand up against the corporate powers and get things done?  Yes, get things done for the American people?

1950, President Truman proposed universal health care.  We still don't have it.  We have the worst tax system, perverse incentives that rewards the speculators on Wall Street.  Why aren't we taxing speculation on Wall Street instead of heavily taxing human labor and sales taxing necessities like food and appliances and furniture and clothing?  There's no debate on this. William Hartung, the independent military analyst, wrote an article the other day saying there's no debate on the bloated military budget, on how best to defend this country without breaking the federal budget and putting huge deficits on the backs of our children and their grandchildren.  We need to shift the power from the few to the many.  And always in American history, every social justice movement was a shift of power from the few to the many. Maybe the slogan should be "Power to the babies."

CONTINUED
< Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >
Rate this story LowHigh
 • View Top Rated stories

Sponsored links

Resource guide

Search Jobs

Find your next car

Find Your Dream Home

Find a business to start

$7 trades, no fee IRAs