|
Yes, it's true. I
live in the land of the Wrestling Governor.
I HATE Jesse Ventura. He's a dumb
ass and proud of it, because he thinks being a willful dumb ass makes him
"one of the common folk."
On the other hand--he came out of
nowhere! Everyone poo-pooed him and frankly, I knew next to nothing about
his candidacy. Everyone said that if you vote for Ventura, you were
throwing away your vote. Well guess what--he brought a lot of people out
of the woodwork, not to mention the disgruntled (if somewhat misguided) voters
who protested against the boring party puppets who everyone thought would get
elected. Is Jesse any more clueless than our other two candidates would
have been? Probably not. Just more visible and less articulate about
it. But he DID prove that a third party vote doesn't have to
be a wasted vote. And it was SOME election night coverage, let me tell
you.
Re: Buchanan. No one in the
past forty years has survived politically by jumping from a major party who
refused to elect them, to a minor third party. This will be the end
of Buchanan's political career, such as it is. Particularly when most of
your THIRD PARTY hates you, to top it off. I think having him run on the
Perot Party (what is it called--"Reform?") is the best thing in the
world for this country.
Anyone remember John
Anderson?
I thought not.
"Those poor
kids. So young. So nauseous."
--Krusty the Klown Telethon
for Motion Sickness
The next myth: Nader
would be a lousy, ineffective
President.
Scenario: Democrats
and Republicans in Congress (as
if I need to bother distinguishing
between them) unite
in opposition against a duly elected Nader,
forming
utter legislative grid-lock. Nader goes
over
Congress’ head to their bosses, the American People
(wow!
now that’s a concept!) and asks that they demand
action from their
representatives. Legislators get
gentle reminder (or if need be,
not so gentle) of
which direction power should and-- given
Nader’s
mandate-- DOES flow.
That’s
right. If he were elected, even with a mere
plurality, Nader would
have an unprecedented mandate
to do the people’s
business. If said business did
NOT get done, do you
honestly think that the people
would merely sit on their hands for four
years waiting
to vote back into office another clownish,
clone-ish
Republicrat? Especially after make such a bold
choice
for Nader? If you believe this to be true, I cannot
for
the life of me understand how you summon the will
to read this, far less
vote and further participate in
the political process.
Folks,
bottom line: it’s about whether you want
corporate government or
not. Both Gore and Bush are
bought and sold by Big Business: so
completely hedged
with soft money that no effective change is
possible.
Ask yourself:
Why is campaign finance reform a dead
issue?
When was the last time you voted FOR someone
for
President?
Why do you think that is?
Do you honestly
believe it’s an accident of history?
Do you honestly believe
that by voting “safe” this
year, you can hope to vote for
someone you REALLY want
in 2004?
When will it change?
How does a vote of fear—a vote for the
status
quo—effect
change?
__________________________________________________
Do
You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
|