My apologies for the lack of Green Party coverage lately. I’m just getting back from my self-imposed break from posting articles the last few months, and our other writers all have their own schedules. Contrary to what some people seem to think, IPR article selection is made by each author individually, not coordinated, and IPR writers post on [read more]
Posted on Green Party Watch:
Al Jazeera’s program “Inside Story” on Friday March 2 was on the subject of the Green Party in America, called “Can the Greens Influence the US Elections?”
After a short interview with Ralph Nader, the show goes to a panel discussion with Tim Dickinson from Rolling [read more]
From Mike Riggs at Reason, describing Gary Johnson’s speech to the ACLU:
Johnson said he’d cut the military’s budget and end Obama’s interventionism. It wasn’t until he got started on legalizing marijuana that the crowd (figuratively) lit up. A steady stream of applause followed Johnson’s declarations after that.
“I support gay marriage equality. I support repealing the PATRIOT Act. I would have vetoed the Department of Homeland Security, because I think it’s redundant. I would’ve never established the department of—the TSA agency. I think we should end the practices of torture. Period. I can understand the complexities in the following, but I think we should end the practices of detainment without being charged. There is nothing I want to see the government come in and fix with the Internet.”
Johnson also made a point throughout the evening of highlighting the differences between himself and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), who sought and received Johnson’s endorsement in 2008.
“I don’t think that Ron Paul is going to win the Republican nomination. For the most part, we are talking about the same message, but we do have differences. And when he drops out, or finds an end to the Republican primary, I don’t see this agenda moving forward,” Johnson said.
“And I think it’s important to point out differences between myself and Ron Paul. I don’t support building a fence across the border, I do support gay marriage equality, I do believe in a strong national defense. I do believe in our alliance with Israel, for example. And I think military alliances are key to reducing military spending by 43 percent and still provide for a strong national defense. And I believe in a woman’s right to choose.”
The crowd went nuts over that last one.
Nate Nelson at United Liberty adds:
Johnson could pose problems for both Obama and the eventual Republican nominee. On the one hand, Johnson built a very solid fiscal and economic record as Governor of New Mexico — which could appeal to Paul supporters and other Republicans as well as right-leaning independents who may feel disaffected if Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum wins the GOP nomination. On the other hand, there are some remarkable differences between Johnson and Paul that could help him succeed in appealing to the more left-leaning so-called “liberaltarians” and even some non-libertarian progressive Democrats and independents whom Paul has so far failed to win over.
It’s unlikely in the extreme that Johnson will win the presidential election. The electoral game is too rigged against third parties and, besides, the Libertarian Party’s dysfunctional nomination process will officially put him into the general election campaign far too late for him to assemble the kind of grassroots movement he’d need to win. But Johnson could well be a problem for both major parties. He could be competitive in his home state and throughout the Southwest, which could make the race for some pivotal swing states even more interesting than usual. In other words, he could play the role of spoiler in the upcoming general election even better than Ralph Nader did in 2000, and it should scare the pants off both Republicans and Democrats that it’s still unclear whose campaign he could spoil.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero also drew the Nader comparison:
“Do you run the risk, in other words, of being a Ralph Nader, given the fact that you have so much more [read more]
Green Party Watch held a presidential poll with the following results:
1,792 votes cast, Jill Stein received 1,223 of them, or 68%. Roseanne Barr, who had just entered the race in the last week, picked up 526 votes, or 29%. There were 35 votes for Kent Mesplay, and 8 votes for Harley Mikkelson
GPW reports that Roseanne Barr is very active on Twitter, and had tweeted a challenge to Bill Maher, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert to have both herself and Jill Stein on their programs.
They also report that Jill Stein is actively [read more]
Posted by Ralph Nader at Nader.org:
The U.S. war in Afghanistan is testing so much futuristic detect and destroy weaponry that it can be called the most advanced all-seeing invasion in military history. From blanket satellite surveillance to [read more]
If one believes that the problem is out-of-control government trampling our Bill of Rights, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the problem is the lack of Christian morals among our civil magistrates, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the problem is the slaughtering of over 50 million innocent unborn babies, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes that the problem is honesty and integrity in the White House, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes that the problem is out-of-control federal spending, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the problem is the United States catering to the evil machinations of the Security Council of the United Nations, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the problem is more and more outsourcing of America’s manufacturing jobs and products, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes that the problem is ever-burgeoning deficit spending, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the problem is the banksters at the Federal Reserve, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the problem is illegal immigration, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution. If one believes the United States gives away far too much foreign aid, Newt Gingrich is definitely not the solution.
Newt Gingrich? Really?
Baldwin goes on to further detail his case against Gingrich, as well as Santorum and Romney, and to elaborate on why he supports Ron Paul.
Paul, who was the 1988 Presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party, is seeking the Republican [read more]
Ralph Nader writes at Nader.org:
The same neocons who persuaded George W. Bush and crew to, in Ron Paul’s inimitable words, “lie their way into invading Iraq” in 2003, are beating the drums of war more loudly these days to attack Iran. It is remarkable how many of these war-mongers are former draft dodgers who wanted other Americans to fight the war in Vietnam.
With the exception of Ron Paul, who actually knows the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, the Republican presidential contenders have declared their belligerency toward Iranian officials who they accuse of moving toward nuclear weapons.
The Iranian regime disputes that charge, claiming they are developing the technology for nuclear power and nuclear medicine.
Nader goes on to examine the historical and geopolitical basis for the developing conflict, and concludes that Congress and the American people should stand up to stop the war before it starts. Read the whole thing.
Nader was an [read more]
Posted by Ralph Nader at Nader.org:
Dear President Obama:
As you prepare your State of the Union address, please be advised that those who support you are very cognizant of what you do not mention in such annual presentations to the Nation. [read more]
Ralph Nader, the former Green Party and Independent presidential candidate writes in the Register Citizen concerning higher education spending cuts in California and how students should feel about them.
Students of California, arise, you have nothing to lose but a crushing debt!
The corporate state of California, ever ready to seize its ideological and commercial hour during a recession, has a chokehold on California’s public universities. With its tax-coddled plutocracy and a nod to further corporatization, the state government has taken the lid off tuition increases big time.
Students of the University of California at Berkeley may pay a proposed $23,000 in tuition by the 2015-2016 school year, up from $11,160 this year (2011) that in turn is up from $2,716 in the academic year 2001-2002. In short, tuition for resident undergraduates has more than quadrupled in ten years.
Before and right after World War II the idea of a public university included a then-called “educational fee” close to zero, from city college of New York to UC Berkeley.
Old timers now look back at those days as economic life-savers toward a degree and a productive life for them and the American economy.
No more. Those gates of opportunity are crumbling at an accelerating pace.
Ralph Nader has run for President numerous times as a third party [read more]
In a rather lengthy piece on Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and the Occupy Wall Street movement, reporter Kris Kitto obtains this nugget from Ralph Nader on Stein’s candidacy:
Former Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader says signature collection alone can consume a third-party campaign’s resources.
“By the time you finish, it’s Labor Day, and you’re exhausted, and you don’t have any money,” says Nader, adding that he sees promise in Stein. “She’s an M.D., which is a good advantage, since healthcare is a big issue … She has a good head on her shoulders.”
Nader’s comments certainly cannot be construed as an [read more]
Ralph Nader at Nader.org:
Congressman Ron Paul introduced H.R. 1831, the “Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2011″ on May 11th of this year. It is a simple bill at just two pages in length, and it would legalize the growing of industrial hemp in the [read more]