the things that i'm most author about the green party one of the main reasons that i voted for ralph nader in two thousand i lived in vermont i knew i could make my vote would much affect the presidential election but i wanted the green party to get the federal matching funds and it's because there are at that time two thousand there were something like three. thirty communities across the country i'm not sure san francisco had by that point yet or not but they're the largest had adopted instead of voting something that is opposed by both democrats and republicans because it would break the doowop away and the green party has been doing this in at the community level and i just have been aggressively encouraging people for ever to get involved with the green party at the local level even if you're going to vote for a democrat or republican at the national level. although i have no problems as i saw the. top of the national post the green party doing right now good grade one something great. you know as you know there are a lot of unhappy campers out there you know with the crisis in our jo

i'm joined now by three-time presidential candidate ralph nader, founder of the center for the study ou, mr. nader. >> good morning, chris. >> your game plan you laid out, i'm going to go through the six points, save the post office, raise the minimum wage, and the bush tax cuts, collect unpaid taxes, end corporate tax loopholes, bring the troops home. i'm thinking at least four of the six of these, seems to me, would set off major fights with republicans. is that your point? >> yeah, the point is the democrats can landslide the republicans in the congressional races by simply taking the side of people. people -- corporations should serve people and not people serve these big corporations. and then they can fill in the blanks. and the record of the republicans is incredibly bad. they have come out in the house against food safety budget. against minimum wage, against clean water. against clean air. they've come out for more war, more military budget. they've protected the corporate tax breaks. they don't want to restore the tax increases on the wealthy. they basically stand are for th

and watch that website americans elect.org. >> thank you, ralph nader. >>> we want to go back to ther storm blast iing t plains right now, because some areas could see a foot or more of snow before that storm heads east to new england. and mike seidel -- oh, my gosh! he is in the middle of it all in duluth, minnesota, and this is a picture i have not seen all year, mike. tell us what is going on. >> yes, this is true. we have not had much of a winter he here, and they are running a three-foot deficit. look at this downtown duluth, it is a whiteout, and we are getting the wind gusts 40 miles per hour, and the only thing that is on the positive side is that the temperature is a relative balmy 30 degrees, but the windchill is 15. and looking down the boardwalk to lake superior, huge waves crashing over the seawall, and we have had six to seven inches of snow, and we have is been pounded, and this a full blown blizzard, and snow and wind which qualifies for a blizzard. look at a lake superior, can you see it? five to six-foot waves crashing over the sea wall and so we are getting spray f

challenges even well financed ones i think have a salutary effect on our so-called two party system ralph nader for example does a good job keeping the democratic party intellectually honest promoting debates within the parties corroded that somewhat with the republicans but actually split some of those votes libertarians do that with republicans too i think these are healthy things that i don't think this is a third party this is you know there's no ideology here third parties come out of ideology that is coming out of twenty two billion dollars from a bunch of billion the ideology is centrist that's what they're advocating for the looking for a candidate they're looking for like the tom friedman fantasy k.o.a. you tom friedman's a billionaire who's a pitch man for billionaires time friedman is nothing more than a corporate shill the mayor tom gallagher of times if you believe in yeah well. i don't know about our rights i mean that's a centrist third party movement that's probably going to be not all that effective and it's i mean it's largely innocuous you think there's like a conspiracy here

i am not up here to condemn ralph nader. i think most of the people who talk about the terrible things he did cannot carry his briefcase. hover, that election could hardly have come out worse. nothing was built. no, i am not blaming ralph nader, per se as a third-party candidate. nothing was builds had bush got elected. you might want to go out into the street and see how people interpret that. >> we do not have much time left and this is not really helping anyone. >> can i give an example? i come from the post fice. i was a letter carrier with the postal service. he know, the postal service is facing very serious problems right now. the democrats and republicans are teaming up to destroy the postal service. they are saying they want to eliminate 200,000 jobs and close nearly 4000 post offices. they want to eliminate saturday delivery and eliminate door to door delivery. president obama two days ago reiterated for the second time that he wants to eliminate saturday delivery. what happened to our friend in the white house? wh

. >> if ralph nader is still alive, we would love to have him on "red eye." >> he has not been heard from, according to my on producer, since 2002. nobody knows where he is. >> and stories so exciting we are not going to do them. are the dead being disenfranchised? either way, i blame obama. >>> why are the departed souls on the roads? i speak of a new report from pew, once again them. it contained significant errors including 1.8 million dead people. the outdated systems failed to keep basic changes in people's lives like dying or moving. why are one in eight registrations contains in accuracies, they don't see it as an indicator of widespread fraud. however, it is a huge cost to taxpayers sending millions of forms and outdated addresses and even the nonliving. for more let's go to red eye's death correspondent now. >> he's seen 8 lot. seen a lot. are the dead or post livers in this modern age should not have a voice in the democratic process? why? >> i think we can all agree that they shouldn't. dead people shouldn't get a say in almost anything. >> come on. >> where is this coming

detail to the chamber of commerce saying the free enterprise system is under attack and he cited ralph nader by name as somehow because the consumer protection issues and the laws that were coming into effect and he called for what he said using activist minded courts to create a corporate rights doctrine in effect to have the corporations come together and find as he said over many years not just a short-term effort, fund over many years a campaign to transform american social political and legal structures to be more favorable to the largest corporations. six months later president nixon appointed him to the supreme court made the same day that he appointed a conservative william rehnquist and it's interesting how to actually ended up being quite different on the court. lewis powell went on to write for cases in the period of about six years that created something that had never before existed in american history, the idea of the corporate states' rights. the first time was 1978 in massachusetts. the first national bank of boston and the digital equipment corporation. it struck down wall i

. >> you cannot be ralph nader of the republican party and push forward. >> ron paul won true conservativeat is interesting kind of to the romney campaign insofar as he has his grassroots young, he has young voters. they have l-o-v-e for paul. the other guy to look at is rick santorum, we know that they are having a conference call on pork barrel spending. how far can you go if you are rick santorum. it's minnesota, colorado and and missouri tomorrow and what is the prognosis? >> i think it's interesting that there was never a real attempt or maybe there was and it did not work, but putting together gingrich and santorum, if there was going to social conservative opposition to romney that had to happen and it just will not happen. he is not going to surge ahead of gingrich. he is doing what he did. he is not taking off. he had a magical moment in iowa and has done nothing since except turn more people off. that had to happen. and if that doesn't happen, it will be interesting to us, but he will limp along getting very few voters. >> i disagree from this standpoint. what might happen tomorr

. >> you could have ralph nader type or feingold type. upset about a lot of the president policies. i think we are more likely to see the split and middle toward the right. that's where the action has been. this is one of the interesting things about this. they don't nowhere they align. >> greta: if they get to convention and no one has 1144 votes who is in charge? who is the leader? >> each state delegation ends up being influential. most state have governors to head it up. if you look for a state that voted for candidate, romney or santorum and they will split it up. there aren't power brokers to divvy up support. romney has the establishment support and he could go in without a majority and pure ralty and win. >> greta: how about gingric gingrich? >> he doesn't have the support without totality of the party to walk in without big chunk of delegates to move things. >> greta: tough break, he was expecting texas to be his turn-around. thought it would be april and now pushed to may. santorum is now leading in the poll. >> and gingrich has to win primaries. santorum is doing that. ro

he cited ralph nader by name, somehow because of the consumer protection issues, and laws that are coming into effect. and he called for what he said using activist minded courts to create a corporate writes. as he said over many years, not just the short-term ever, fund over many years a campaign to transform american social, poker and legal structures to be more favorable to the largest corporation. six months later president nixon appointed him to the supreme court. same he appointed a conservative, william rehnquist. and it is interesting of those to in the past been quite different on the corporate lewis powell went on to write for cases in the period of about six years the greatest something that had never before existed in american history. yet corporate speech rights the first time is 1970 with a case in massachusetts ar. it struck down our law in massachusetts that kept corporations and spinning in citizens referenda. in some ways it was a preview of citizens united. and lewis powell wrote the 5-4 decision to the conservative william rehnquist out a passionate dissent saying that

ralph nader pegged it well when he said give them gadgets to hold in their hand and they think they have power but real power is not there. it is political power. the sort of soothing rise of drugs, enormous and giving them to toddlers which is quite a part of big pharma's agenda. so finally you get some cross and that is what they have done. i don't think orwell is necessary. just part of the hysteria the united states has as it loses its moorings. what kind of clout it has but frankly i don't agree with chris hedges of the ruling class is running scared. they sleep very well and they know they are going to keep -- that 1% -- more than 90% of its wealth. that is where we are. to me it is a ghastly sort of vision. it is a grim thing. try talking to americans about anything serious. they change the subject. they can't handle it. >> what do you think about the lack of empathy and message you get from the media is controlled or script or selected what you are going to see on tv and what you are not going to see? how do you think that all plays in? >> the or original title of this book was c

40s and done its work greatly, but the mention of an ipod, cell phones, and all that stuff, and ralph nader pegged it well, give them gadgets in their hands, and they think it's power. that's not the power. it's political power. the sort of soothing kind of, not only that, but then the rise of drugs like prozac and now giving them to toddlers, giving drugs to 4-year-olds now which is quite, you know, quite a part of big agenda, and so finally, you get a crores between orwell and huxley, and i think that's what they got. i don't think orwell is necessary. it's just a hysteria that the united states has as it loses because i have to talk about what ows really means, you know, and what kind of clout it is, but frankly, i don't agree with kris hedges that the ruling class is running scared. i think they sleep well in their beds, and i think they know they'll keep that 1% that keeps them more than 90% of its wealth, the wealth of the country. they know that, you know? so i mean, that's what i say where we're at, and, to me, it's a very ghastly vision, a grim thing. you know, try talking to ameri

bush the election and look at ralph nader in 2000 and say he cost al gore the election.te from the left could certainly do a lot of damage. perhaps even to barack obama. do you see it happening? >> well, i have a little different take although i thought the points cal made were extremely good. i honestly believe the failure of a political institution, has outraged americans across the spectrum of politics and has given the impetus for outside forces from tea parties to occupy wall streeters, to actually be the agent for any achievement that we presently are having, because, americans really do believe that these parties, leadships, are more concerned about the politics of survival of their party, than they are about the survival of the american way of life. that is the american dream. and what people are looking for, and why you see them in the republican primary, jumping from one candidate to the other, someone who eventually says, hey, look, here's where we are. this is what we have to do, based on the facts. and, these are the benchmarks we have to hit and i'm willing

and on the point of the dividend, didn't we have ralph nader on? a share of 18,000 shares. he got a decrease. it's now eight cents is share. it's a 33% increase. is it going to make a dent in the 60 -- $54 billion in cash they have or so. >> probably not. they continue to make money when they pay out the dividend. the valuation here is not stretched in any way. so i'm giving the cash. the multiple is still very low here. certainly versus their historic low. it's worth a look here. even though you could have bought it cheaper a few months ago. the question is where do you go from here? worth a look. >> let's bring in brian marshall listening to the conference call. brian, your impressions from the call? are you getting any indication from chambers that this is a turnaround -- paret of the turnaround behind it? >> obviously the quarter was good. i do think this has momentum. clearly the company's back on track. they grew 11% year to year versus the guidance of 7% to 8%. that is off the low comparison from last year. but they raised the dividend 33%. so i think things are movi

he cited ralph nader by name because of the consumer protection issue and laws that were coming into effect and he called for what he said using activist minded courts to create a corporate rights doctrine in effect. corp's come together and fund over many years of liberal not just short-term effort but over many years a campaign to transformed american social, political and legal structures to be more favorable to the largest corporations. six months later president nixon appointed him to the supreme court. the same day he appointed a conservative, william rehnquist. interesting how those two ended up being ended up writing four cases in six years that created something that never before existed in american history. the idea of corporate speechwriting. first time in 1978 in massachusetts first national bank of boston, gillette and digital script corp. struck down the law in massachusetts that helps corporations from spending in citizen referendums. with a preview of citizens united. lewis powell wrote the 5-4 decision. william rehnquist wrote a passionate defense saying corporations