"John Kerry Must Resign"
Time to Dispense With a Third Party Candidate
By Alex Nosal
According to the CBS-New York Times poll conducted this month, George W. Bush leads John Kerry 46 percent to 43 percent. But with Ralph Nader in the race, the president leads Kerry 46 percent to 38 percent, with 7 percent of those polled going with Nader.While most Americans dont want to see George Bush re-elected, the addition of Ralph Nader could tip the scales in favor of the president come November. Many Americans are on the mark when they say there is no room for a third party candidate if they hope to unseat Bush. America cannot regain the respect of the world, stop years of projected military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, create new jobs at home, tend to the medical needs of all of its citizens and improve the general lot of the average working person if Bush and his special interest agenda is extended for another four years. This writer feels only one logical solution is viable to prevent such an outcome that will not only ensure the removal of Bush, but also guarantee real and progressive change for a new America. John Kerry is an intelligent, charming and experienced politician. More than anyone, Kerry knows now that the decision of Ralph Nader to enter the race puts a new spin on what is already unfolding to be perhaps the most significant election in modern American history. Therefore Kerry, who I believe truly cares for his country, must do the honorable thing and immediately resign from the Democratic Party and throw his full support behind Ralph Nader. At first glance this might seem ridiculous because Kerry's numbers after all are far greater than Nader's, but that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Ralph, after all, accepts no campaign donations, belongs to no party, virtually has no media coverage and is barred from all major political debates by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) in spite of the fact that only "three contestants" are vying for the presidency! Yet Nader still has garnered an incredible 7 percent of the vote.Now Ralph would be the first one to say that he considers John Kerry a nice guy and holds nothing personally against him. Ralph might even consider Kerry to run as his vice presidential running mate. But as Ralph wrote in his book "Crashing the Party" which chronicled his failed bid for the presidency last time, "Even the well-intentioned candidates cannot deliver on their sincere promises, because once they are in the White House or Congress, they are in a cocoon spun by thousands of corporate lobbyists." Ralph on the other hand has championed the little guy more than any other popular figure in America when it comes to taking on the corporate Goliath. If it came down to only a two man race between George and Ralph, it would mark the first time in more than a century that Americans would have a realistic shot of finally electing someone who represents, as author/film director Michael Moore puts it, the bottom 80 percent of Americans.
|George Bush ||Vs.||John Kerry|
Americans might at first be a little nervous that Nader has no party with which to organize an administration with. But Nader would simply choose existing Democrats and Republicans based on their record rather than their political affiliation. After all, Nader likes Republican John McCain and Democrat Dennis Kucinich, but distrusts Republican George Bush and Democrat Bill Clinton. Nader judges each individual solely by his actions with no concern for official labels. That should be a refreshing thought for any citizen out there.Our two party system has evolved into a nothing more than an extravagant, corporate sponsored, circus show replete with all the repetitive glitter and mindless rhetoric that we have become accustomed to for the last 50 years. The issues are now chosen for us ad nauseum and any dissent or variation of the chosen theme by civic groups, average citizens or outspoken critics are marginalized, ignored or deleted from the mainstream media.But how could the media possibly ignore the only candidate who is truly out of the corporate loop (the only candidate who doesn't depend on corporate financing) if we only had two people vying for the White House? Could you imagine a presidential debate void of rhetoric? Perhaps Bush would simply refuse all debates and rely more heavily on his expensive TV smear campaign ads? Even worse the media might ignore Kerry's bold move to resign and pretend it was just a mild bump in the road as they switched their focus to the new democratic replacement? But this would greatly underestimate the publics intelligence and would most certainly backfire.
|George Bush ||Vs.||Ralph Nader |
Now of course the fundraisers for the Democrats would have a conniption. All of those Washington lobbyists who figured they had all the angles covered by sponsoring both parties and therefore couldn't lose no matter who won, would suddenly find themselves scrambling for a way to maintain the status quo. Nader to them would be the equivalent of the anti-Christ to Pope John Paul. Corporate America already had a taste of Nader politics in the 1960s when Ralph exposed intentionally defective cars and forced auto giants to build safer cars and clean up their act. While Nader pressed ahead with legislation that eventually saved hundreds of thousands of American lives who would have otherwise died on American highways, it was also a financial headache for GM, Ford and Chrysler CEOs as their multi million dollar bonuses were suddenly threatened. Ralph didn't stop there either. Pharmaceutical companies, loggers, WMD manufacturers, insurance companies, and a host of other multi-nationals have invested massive amounts of funds to craft today's system of government; a finely tuned machine that taxes the majority of Americans and then doles it out to a select few corporations. Of course not all corporations would shudder at the thought of President Nader, but all corporations who depend on corporate welfare, all corporations who in fact do business with no regard to the consequences it has on the public and any special interest groups who have grown accustomed to having the government in their pocket would have everything to fear.
Under our current and entrenched two party political system, everyday real issues that concern the average working American are simply not addressed. The reason for this is powerful special interest groups dont represent the general populace. That's why they're called special interests! So even though egalitarian programs like universal health care are immensely popular and successful in the rest of the developed world, they'll never get off the ground in the U.S. simply because they wont do squat for HMO, pharmaceutical or other corporate profits at home. And this is precisely why the general public wont hear such important topics as universal health care, replacing minimum wage with a living wage, campaign finance reform, fair trade and a host of other fundamental issues discussed in any significant depth under the current system. For a candidate to just publicly discuss alternatives outside of the agreed corporate framework would result in the rescinding of major corporate sponsorship those candidates have grown to rely on for their political survival.Now anyone familiar with Ralph Nader knows that he is neither anti-corporate or a Communist. Instead Nader is someone who believes that democracy should be government rule by "the people" as compared to a plutocracy, "rule by the wealthy and powerful." This novel concept, outlined by the Greeks as well as our Founding Fathers, would shake the foundations of our system of government, as we know it. Televised debates between Nader and Bush, or any mainstream candidate for that matter, would expose this reality to all Americans. But if Americans are forced to hear the same old scripted rhetoric of the Democratic and Republican propaganda machines, well be lulled into the belief that those two parties are the only realistic choices available to us. The result will be a public who perpetuates the corporate vision of America while further eroding our battered democracy as we head to the polls this November. Isn't it about time that we end this madness Mr. Kerry?
|Ralph Nader supporters|
Other Articles by Alex Nosal
Is Conscription Imminent?
The World at $100 A Barrel
Vladivostok, Europe in Middle of The Orient
A Beach Lover's Paradise: Boracay
Mr. Alex Nosal, who serves as travel editor/writer for The Seoul Times, is a resident of Korea since 1996. Alex has attended the University of Toronto (business), York University (history), NYU (film) and Stetson College of Law in St. Petersburg before settling in Songtan. As an expert in travel industry Alex has extensively traveled to over 75 countries on six continents for over 10 years.