Latest From LaRouche
This statement by Presidential candidate Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. was released on Feb. 5 by the LaRouche in 2004 campaign committee.
Thumbs Up! Or, Thumbs Down! The Roman Empire, too, had its Super Bowl Sundays and Tuesdays. So, in the course of time, Rome's spectators died in their own arena. There was the Super Bowl on the day before Groundhog Day, Sunday. Then, there was the Super Fishbowl game on Election Day, Tuesday. On Tuesday, the citizens marched from where they had been sitting as spectators, to take their places as the gladiators dying in the bloody arena below...link to complete statement
Delaware News Journal Perspective: Act Fast To Fix War Doctrine, Fiscal Policy
The following op-ed by Lyndon LaRouche was published in the Delaware News-Journal on Feb. 1, and was posted to its website www.delawareonline.com.
There are, in fact, two leading issues on the agenda for the 2004 Presidential election: the issue of the war policy of the current Bush Administration, and the onrushing collapse of the world's floating-exchange-rate monetary system.
Regarding the first: Since Dick Cheney's conclusion of his term as Secretary of Defense under President George H.W. Bush, the current Vice President has been committed to a doctrine of preventive nuclear warfare. Although his policy was rejected by the first Bush Administration at that time, Cheney has nursed that policy during the years since.
In the aftermath of the events of Sept. 11, 2001, Vice President Cheney has foisted that policy on the Administration of President George W. Bush, and has employed impeachable acts of fraud to bring about the invasion of Iraq as a step of implementation of his war policy.
Cheney's overreaching influence over the current Administration has led to a ruin of our republic's relations with Europe and other parts of the world. Cheney's Svengali-like influence over the President is therefore the leading threat to our national security today.
On the second matter: We are at the brink of a general world financial collapse worse than that of 1929-32. The principal cause of this has been a 40-year drift of U.S. policy away from the policies that defined us as the world's leading producer nation, into being a post-industrial ruin, a bread-and-circuses culture that subsists on the cheap labor of other nations that have replaced our own industries.
We could come out of this catastrophe if we would apply the precedent of the economic recovery under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and combine those domestic reforms with appropriate cooperation with other nations. The greatest obstacle to national survival today is the reluctance of a large portion of our population to give up the habits associated with 40 years of cumulative deindustrialization.
We have now reached the point where there is a clear choice between returning to the legacy of a producer society or accepting the misery that clinging to recent decades' trends are bringing down upon us all.
Learn more online at www.larouchein2004.com.
LaRouche Interview, KRCJ-TV, Missouri: I'm the Only Qualified To Deal With This Kind of Crisis
On Feb. 2, Lyndon LaRouche was interviewed on KRCJ-TV, Channel 13, in Jefferson City, Missouri.
Q: What brings you here, to Missouri?
A: Well, I am running for the Democratic nomination for President. And, as of this pointI think very soonyou're going to find that all the other rivals, but Kerry and I, are going to disappear. At that point, we are not going to have a "Super Bowl election," as we've been having up to now. People are going to realize, the election is not about the candidate. It's about them. And the issue is war. And the issue is economy. And, I think, interplay between me and Kerry, and possibly a few other people getting in the act to get this discussion on the right level, and talking about people and their concern, not about which candidate is the most beautiful. Obviously Kerry would win that!
Q: As a personal statement, what makes you better than the other guys?
A: I know what I'm doing.
On the issue of economy, I'm the only one that's qualified to deal with this kind of crisis. In an ordinary situation, I wouldn't even bother going against Kerry, seriously. But, in this case, he's probably good on the war question. But, on the question of the economy, I don't think he's up to speed, yet.
Q: Now, as you're campaigning on the Democratic side, tell me, are you anxious? Or, are you for seeing early release of the information on the war in Iraq, in the non-smoking-gun issue? They say, after the election, this material should become available.
A: Well, what the issue is, it's going to come available earlier. I've been pushing this thing. I'm the one that started this riot, and I've got people working on itand a lot of peoplespilling over what I started: I've been moving for Cheney's indictment, or his resignation or impeachment, on the basis of crimes against the Constitution, on his using fraud to get us into a war which is illegal. Also, he's indictable by the United Nations, for war crimes, on the basis of his lies to bring on a war. So, I'm dead serious on that.
I think Kerry probably would tend to sympathize with me on that, so I won't take any flesh on his bones, on that one.
Q: All right. So, that's going to be part of your major platform, I guess? Or is there more to it?
A: Mostly, it's the economic question. If we get out of the war, we could get cooperationI know it. I'm personally involved overseas. We could get cooperation from other countries: For example, if I were nominated as President, at that point, the policies of nations around the world would change, merely on that fact. Because my policies are known in Europe and elsewhere, and in many parts of the world, they like them.
Q: Tell me now, this is important for our part of the country: How do you stand on abortion?
A: I don't think the Federal government should be involved in that as an issue. That should be an issue of the states. And I'm also opposed to single issues. I don't think single issues in politics are legitimate.
Q: Very good! You hit just exactly where I was driving in this. These issues, should they be handled by state court systems, or state government?
A: No, there actually is a Supreme Court role in this thing, eventually. There is also, something the Congress may become involved in, in peripheral issues, health issues, and so forth. But, the President of the United States should not be involved in single issues, on ethics and morality. He has a function: He must stick to that function. He may have his own views, and he may express them privately. But, he should not use the Presidency of the United States to divert from other responsibilities he has, which are his. Let the states and the courts deal with what they should deal with.
Q: In your own words, in a real quick statement, what is the President of the United States to you?
A: The President of the United States is the head of a unique institution in the world. It's the best in the world, of its type: It's the Presidency. It's the responsibility for all of the Executive functions of government and our relations with other nations. And that's what the President must stick to.
Q: So, are you speaking highly of foreign policy, then?
A: Absolutely. I'm probably the best-qualified foreign policy expert in the United States, today.
Q: What makes you qualified for that?
A: I've been doing it for a long time.
Q: Give me a little background, real quick, so we can have some.
A: Well, for example, I've been pushing for this reform. I was very upset, many years ago, by what happened to Kennedy, in the 1962 Missile Crisis, and the entering into this crazy Indo-China War: At that point, I began to get serious about politics. I began teaching on these issues, because I was serious about educating younger people. I became highly controversial. I became involved in Middle East peace, at a high level; I became involved, actually, with Reagan on the SDII was the one who initiated the proposal.
So, I've been involved with foreign policy, with relations with Russians; with nations in Europe, with leading circles there; and the Far East, for a long time; as well as South and Central America.
Q: So, lastly, what're you doing here today? Tell me what you're going to be discussing?
A: Well, today, I'm here, because this is Missouri. This is one of my states. And I have some responsibility, and I have some fine people here. And I'm working with them.
Q: Anything else you want to add?
A: Well, I'm looking forward to. I am also interested in something, which I think is important: the education issue, the higher education in the state of Missouri. And I should state, because people are going to ask the question, my view is, the Federal government has to adopt two policies: One, we have to be committed to the development of higher education for all people; we need to do that becausewe have to upgrade our whole population. Secondly, the role should be, the states should be responsible for education, but the Federal government must provide the means by which the states can deal with that charge.
Q: So, you're looking for more money for the state?
A: That's right.
Q: From the government? From the Feds?
A: That's right. It's a Federal responsibilitythose things which fall between the cracks of the state and private industry, belong to the government, the Federal government. The Federal government must use those responsibilities.
Q: Very good, sir. Thank you. I appreciate your time, and your keen ability to do well on camera!
LaRouche's Feb. 2 Press Conference in Jefferson City, Missouri: 'Now It's Going To Get Serious...'
Lyndon LaRouche: The important thing is this, there is now a phase-change in the situation in the Presidential campaign. Until this point, the Presidential campaign is fairly characterized, as the voters looking at the candidates as if they were watching the Super Bowl. The voters are not thinking about themselves, in terms of their choice. They're simply choosing among their favorite teams and players.
Now, it's going to get serious. Most of the candidates are going to fall away, very soon. Some are already falling away. Lieberman is finished, in effect, as a Democrat. He should probably join the Republican Partywould clarify things a bit. But, the situation now is, that Kerry is a leading candidate, which is going to finish off some of the others. I will be in as a candidate, all the way through.
Now, what's going to happen now? At present, we have two issues, before the voterstwo crucial issues, which decide everything else: Number one: the war question. Not just Iraq, but the fact that Cheney has committed impeachable offenses, in pushing the United States, through fraud, into a war, which should not have happened. But, worse than that, that Cheney has a policy of extending this war policy to other nations [as] targets. That's the number-one, hot item on the press.
Number two, however, the real issue, is the economic crisis. The world is going into the worst depressionworse than we experienced during the 1929- 33 period, now. And this issue has to be faced. What is going to happen now, with the recycling of veterans returning from the war in Iraq, and reporting what they've gone through their families, and others, here; and with the economic crisis, the issue is not going to be, voting for a candidate, but voting for a candidate in a way which is relevant to their own interests. In other words, it is the voters, themselves, who are up before the camera, not the candidates. The question is, what are the problems that the people of the United States face, in this period? And how are the candidates relevant, to solutions to those problems?
So, the agenda's going to change. Where people are voting as spectators up to nowthey're going to stop voting as spectators. They're going to have to begin to vote as people who are in the arena, themselves. And it's their problems, that have to be solved. Not the problems of which candidate has the best slogans.
So, that's what my primary mission is, at this point.
News-Tribune: What is your main reason why you are seeking to be President?
A: I'm the only one that's qualified. Kerry would probably be capable of dealing with the war questionthat is, getting us out of Iraq, and probably stopping similar wars. That we probably have similar opinions. The problem issue, would become the issue of the economic issue.
Q: Okay.
A: I think that Kerry probably would tend to accept the ideas of Bob Rubin, the former Treasury Secretary, on the crisis. The problem is that, Rubin himself, so far, has not indicated that he's willing to consider a change in the system. I'm insisting that only a change in the system would workthat is, the Federal government has to put the present international monetary system, and the U.S. system, into bankruptcy reorganization, in order to start a recovery program.
Q: So, you are the only person qualified to be President?
A: For that reason. That reason, principally. I have many other qualifications, but the thing that's crucial in my role at this time, is this economic question.
Q: So, economically, you're the person that's qualified to be President.
A: Yep.
Q: Okay.
You know, you've run for office a number of times, and you haven't received as much support as a lot of people do. Why do you keep running?
A: Because I'm right. See, people have the wrong idea: They think oflike a star rating of Hollywood movies, or something like thatthe Presidency. It is not. Running for the Presidency is very serious business. It's a long-haul business. I have been right, in all the times I've run. And those who oppose me have been wrong.
Now we have the crisis I warned against. I tried to prevent thisit's happened. Now, they have no choice. It's the last chance. If we don't deal effectively with this crisis, we may not have a United States.
Q: And you're speaking again, of the economic crisis.
A: That's right: The economic crisis is beyond belief. Internationally, as well as here.
Q: Okay.
How old are you?
A: Eighty-one.
Q: Okay. Some people might think that you're too old. What do you have to say to them?
A: Well, probably, I'm more mature. [laughing]
Q: Okay. And then
A: I'm in good condition, fairly, too. Better condition than the President. Especially from the neck up!
Q: Some people think that you're a little off the wall. What do you say to that?
A: Well, I say that people aren't paying attention to business.
Q: Oh, okay. What do you think you'll do, if you're elected? What's your big priority?
A: Well, the first thing I'd do. Well, even then, if I'm nominated, by the convention in July, in Boston, that will change world politics. Because that nomination will cause things to "click in" which I've been discussing with governments abroad, will immediately click in on their part. So therefore, my Presidency would begin, the moment I was nominatednot in terms of the powers of office, but in terms of influence in shaping the policy of the nation.
Q: Um-hmm, okay.
What do you think of the other candidates, like Kerry and Edwards, and ?
A: Well, Kerry is interesting, because Kerry is a really, in general, a qualified candidate. In normal times, you would say, Kerry is the type of candidate you would just elect and say, "Okay, he's good enough." In this period, he's not, only because I think, of the economic question. He has a slight Hamlet tendency, "go along to get along" tendency. But, apart from that, he has certain qualifications, and with the right team, and with my backing, he would be successful. Under normal conditions.
The issue now, is the economic issuethat's where he has a problem. And he has a problem, because of his advisors, his backers and so forth; the Kennedy family, and so forth. They are behind him. But, he has this problem, and they have this problem: They are not willing to bite the bullet on the economic issue.
Q: Okay, so, like, if you are not in the election, who's your favorite?
A: I have no favorite. I'd say, [there would be] disaster. I probably would end up supporting Kerry, but that would be at a later stage. Not now.
Now, is not a question of who should get the nomination now: What we need now, is a long period of discussion, among leading figures, about what the policy of the United States should be. The American voters have got to stop being spectators for a Super Bowl game, which is what the election has been so far, and start to think about themselves. What are their problems? And what use are these candidates with their policies, in solving their problems?
Q: Okay, but Kerry is your most?
A: Well, that's reality. Kerry is now the leading candidate. The others are going to drop away, out of incompetence. I'm in there, with competence.
So, the issue is, the important thing is, the discussionon the one side, from Kerry, and from meto give the American people a choice of thinking about what the issues are, not who is the favorite beauty star?
Q: Okay. And then, you're most qualified because of economics. Anything else. again?
A: Yes. Oh, I've got a lot of qualifications. I'm probably the best-known internationally for foreign policy. I'm the best-known internationally, in terms of long-term association with people throughout the Americas, in Africa, in Eurasia, in general.
Q: Uh-huh, okay. And, what do you label yourself asas a Democrat? As ?
A: I'm a Democrat! I'm a solidI'm an FDR Democrat: a genuine, Franklin Delano Roosevelt Democrat.
Q: Okay, I guess that's all I need to know!
A: Okay! Good!
|