Lis­ten: Side 1 | Side 2

1. In this most closely decided elec­tion, the small per­cent­age of the vote gar­nered by Green Party can­di­date Ralph Nader did, as some crit­ics had warned it would, prove to have deci­sive impact. A vote for Nader was indeed a vote for Bush, par­tic­u­larly in Florida. (Nader got more than 90,000 votes in Florida.)

2. This pro­gram illu­mi­nates some aspects of Nader’s finan­cial and pro­fes­sional his­tory that have escaped pop­u­lar atten­tion. The broad­cast begins with an arti­cle by Mar­tin Kil­ian, a char­ter mem­ber of the Green Party in Ger­many. Kil­ian penned a crit­i­cal analy­sis of the Nader can­di­dacy that was posted on the Consortium’s web site. (consortiumnews.com; 11/1/2000.)

3. The Con­sor­tium is an asso­ci­a­tion of alter­na­tive jour­nal­ists. Kil­ian warned against the polit­i­cal imma­tu­rity of the Nader can­di­dacy, fail­ing to take into account both the nature of the Amer­i­can elec­toral sys­tem and the social and envi­ron­men­tal con­se­quences of a Bush pres­i­dency. (Idem.)

4. The bal­ance of the first side of the broad­cast fea­tures an arti­cle about the hyp­o­crit­i­cal invest­ment pol­icy that Ralph Nader has exe­cuted. (“How Nader Prof­its While He Preaches” by Jeff McMa­hon; bushwatch.net/nader.htm; 10/27/2000.)

5. Nader owns up to $250,000 worth of shares of Fidelity Mag­el­lan Fund, a firm that is heav­ily invested in many of the cor­po­ra­tions that Nader has been most vocal in crit­i­ciz­ing. (Idem.)

6. Among those firms that Fidelity invests in are Hal­libur­ton oil, headed by Dick Cheney up until recently. Fidelity also invests in Occi­den­tal Petro­leum, a firm that has been crit­i­cized by envi­ron­men­tal­ists. Al Gore’s mother’s trust owns a sig­nif­i­cant block of Occi­den­tal stock. Gore’s pop­ulist cre­den­tials have been impugned Nader Vice-Presidential can­di­date Winona La Duke because of that stock. (Idem.)

7. The sec­ond side high­lights dis­turb­ing aspects of Nader’s anti-labor activ­i­ties, and his avoid­ance of social issues. (“1.75 Cheers for Ralph” by Doug Hen­wood; Left Busi­ness Observer; 10/1996 [#74].)

8. Next, the pro­gram turns to the effect a Bush admin­is­tra­tion will have on issues that are at the core of the Green/Nader cam­paign. (“The Last Green Mile” by Thomas L. Fried­man; New York Times; 12/ 8/2000; p. A31.)

9. The fed­eral appoint­ments that Bush will make are going to have an immensely neg­a­tive impact on the inter­pre­ta­tion of Fed­eral reg­u­la­tions on the envi­ron­ment, in par­tic­u­lar. (Idem.)

10. The broad­cast con­cludes with dis­cus­sion of a fed­eral appeals court deci­sion that dis­missed a law­suit chal­leng­ing the con­sti­tu­tional legit­i­macy of a Bush/Cheney ticket. (“Cheney Ruled a Res­i­dent of Wyoming” AP; Los Ange­les Times; 12/8/2000; 12/8/2000.)

11. Three of the four judges were appointed by Pres­i­dent Bush, the other by Rea­gan. (Idem.)

12. Pro­gram High­lights Include: Nader’s role in under­min­ing air­line and truck­ing work­ers in the 1970’s (“1.75 Cheers for Ralph” by Doug Hen­wood; Left Busi­ness Observer; 10/1996 [#74].)

13. Nader’s fight to pre­vent union­iza­tion in a pub­li­ca­tion he founded (Idem.).

14. Nader’s alleged refusal to pre­vent pub­li­ca­tion of CIA/corporate col­lu­sion in his Multi­na­tional Mon­i­tor (Idem.).

15. Nader’s role in effec­tively neu­tral­iz­ing a big­ger union drive at Pub­lic Cit­i­zen (Idem.).

16. Nader’s exces­sive secrecy about his own finan­cial affairs (“How Nader Prof­its While He Preaches” by Jeff McMa­hon; bushwatch.net/nader.htm; 10/27/2000.).

17. A detailed list of the var­i­ous cor­po­ra­tions Nader invest in and (hyp­o­crit­i­cally) crit­i­cizes at the same time. (Idem.)