Let me first say that I respect Nader's activism. What he's done in the arena of consumer safety is legendary and should be applauded, but I respect that in the same way I respect John McCain's military service. But, this is the here and now, not 1967. I'm sure the young lady who left a comment wasn't alive in '67 and probably never rode in a Corvair, but that's irrelevant.
What is relevant is that in 2008, we have the choice between two parties and a member of one of those parties, Democrat or Republican, will be the next President of the United States. Ralph Nader has zero chance to win. Snowballs have a better chance in Hell.
That said, I want the next President to be a Democrat, not a Republican who will continue the policies and criminality of George W. Bush and his henchmen. John McCain has already stated that he wouldn't mind "being in Iraq for a hundred years". Mitt Romney sees the same thing for our future. Both Republican candidates are unacceptable on many levels.
Our best chance is a Dem, be it Hillary or Barack, and Nader stands, with his candidacy, more likely to take votes from a Dem than a Republican (That is a proven fact, Ms. Vyas). With the hurdles the Republicans have erected in the political process (co-opting the media, Diebold, the Christian 'voice from the pulpit', illegal gerrymandering) for Dems, do they really need the complication of overcoming the 'Nader vote' too? Whether he was or wasn't the reason Al Gore lost in 2000, do we really need to take the chance of another 8 years of Bush-esque policy this time?
In 2000, things were different. The economy was strong, we weren't in an endless occupation that is siphoning off American money and lives, and we didn't have a President who wiped his ass with the Constitution. We hadn't lived through the Bush Presidency and I actually gave Nader credit for running on principle (regardless of where his financing came from), even considered voting for him, but it's 8 years down the road now.
2008 sees this nation in shambles, a pariah in the international arena and a government run by criminals. A change has to be made and while I admit, Hillary or Barack are not my first or second choices to do the job, either is far better that McCain and Romney. The country will be bankrupt and defenseless by the time they're done.
Being an idealist, and anyone who's read my books knows I'm a big one, I wholeheartedly support campaigns based on an idealistic platform. I've told Mrs. F many times that if I won a couple hundred million in the Power Ball, I'd run myself. This is not the time for idealism. This is the time for pragmatic reality.
The reality is that the American people have to stand behind the candidate who has the best chance of righting the wrongs that have been committed in our name over the past 8 years. That would be the Democratic nominee. My apologies to Ralph and his supporters, and he has every right to get his name on the ballot if he can, but he must realize the prevailing situation. He must realize how precarious our position on the world stage, as well as domestically, is. He must realize how torn and tattered our Constitution is having weathered 8 years of Bush. If he loves America as much as he says he does, if he cares for the American people as much as his activism leads us to believe, he will see that his candidacy at this point could push this nation over the precipice we're balanced on. Why would he possibly take the chance at this dangerous time?
The time for playing around is over, Ralph. If your potential candidacy is anything more than an attempt to garner attention, if your plans have any connection to reality, you will see America does not need the complication of you. If you want to do something for America, get the hell out of the way and support the Democrat. If we get through the next 4 years, have at it, but in 2008 it'd be best for all concerned if you stayed home and shut the fuck up*.
No comments:
Post a Comment