Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow op-ed arrow Nader and McKinney: 'Wasting' a Vote for Lincoln’s 'Radical' Ideal
Oct 19 2008
Nader and McKinney: 'Wasting' a Vote for Lincoln’s 'Radical' Ideal | Print |  E-mail
Op_ed
By Robert Weitzel   

Translation

Or Why I’m Voting for NaderImage

I had just pressed the “donate now” button on votenader.org when my email pinged. It was a rambling missive from Neil, a self-described “Grumpy Old Son Of A Beach” who’d read an article I’d written for the American Atheist magazine. Neil argued that atheists should vote against “Oduma” and for the McCain/Palin ticket. I’ll spare you the details . . . just imagine Hannity and O’Reilly and Limbaugh joined at their bums flapping their gums.

I wrote a short reply thanking him for sharing his views and telling him I plan to vote for Nader. Ralph did, after all, send me a signed copy of his book, “in pursuit of justice: collected writings 2000-2003” for my several donations—and all I really wanted was a yard sign.

Faster than I thought an electron could make the round trip, Neil was pinging again: “Well Bob, I’m sorry to read that. I guess you really have NO ‘F’ing clue as to what is at stake when you are going to waste your vote on someone who will not even make a dent.”

He added a postscript: “P.S. The Iraq war is FULLY Justified [sic] and I have a minimum of 18 FACTS which prove it.” Neil did not provide the “FACTS,” which is a real shame since my mood has plunged lower than the Dow as the economic meltdown continues to add “miles” to my career path. I could have used a chuckle.

However, the issue Neil raises about wasting a vote is nothing to chuckle about. It is as serious as Mutley, my neighbor’s Pit Bull.

Mutley, you should know, has been voted time and again the greatest threat to the physical and psychological wellbeing of the neighborhood children. Unfortunately, Mutley’s human friend is a brute named Cliff who can beat the crap out of the rest of us guys on the block. Talk about wasted votes. Our only hope is that either a guy tougher than Cliff who hates dogs moves in or Mutley—and/or Cliff— DIE.

If you’re fortunate enough not to have Mutley and Cliff in your neighborhood, the best example I can give of wasted votes is to continually vote for either the Democratic or Republican parties that are continually getting us into foreign policy debacles such as the Vietnam and Iraq wars, and whose hubris or stupidity or greed or [your best guess] or all of the above has led the country and the world into the current economic meltdown.

While a Democratic president lied to escalate the war in Vietnam, a Republican president lied to take America to war in Iraq. With a few notable exceptions, members of Congress from both sides of the aisle fell into formation with their American flag lapel pins unfurled and goose-stepped down Pennsylvania Avenue in time with President Bush’s war drums.

In 2006 the midterm vote gave Democrats a clear mandate to end the war and hold the Bush administration accountable. Predictably, Democratic pols stuck their mugs in front of the cameras and talked tough for a few days and then did nothing—politics as usual . . . wasted votes as usual.

In 1933, the Glass-Steagall Act was intended to prevent the kind of banking shenanigans that have helped to plunge the world into worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. But legislation written by Republicans Phil Gramm and James Leach and signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999.

To address the current economic crisis, the best a bipartisan effort can come up with is a $700 billion-plus bailout for their Wall Street cronies and ex-colleagues, which also includes over a billion dollars stuffed into the pork barrel for themselves but no provisions to help millions of homeowners renegotiate their mortgages, allowing them to remain in their homes and afford their monthly payments.

There is nothing like Glass-Steagall in this golden rescue plan, nothing to prevent Everyman (a.k.a. NASCAR dads and mall maven moms) from losing another trillion in the value of their 401Ks, nothing to prevent the privatized profits and socialized risks of corporate socialism from becoming institutionalized . . . nothing in this plan but politics as usual.

Neil is ranting about third party voters who “have NO ‘F’ing clue” when they waste their votes “on someone who will not even make a dent.” And yet the corporate-controlled political system in our country is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans who time and again waste their votes on two parties with track records for little more than self-preservation, corrupt-crony politics and for not making a “dent” . . . unless, of course, it’s to total the entire country.

The campaigns of Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney are not the acts of spoilers or vanity candidates. They are the acts of third party candidates struggling for the magical 15 percent that will allow them to challenge the hegemony of the Democratic and Republican parties in televised debates viewed by over 70 million voters. They are the acts of American citizens who believe it is a constitution rather than a corporate charter that is the governing document of our Republic.

Nader and McKinney are not naďve enough to think they’ll need to keep millions of donors’ dollars in reserve for their inaugural balls. They are campaigning for something more important than the presidency. They are campaigning to bring about systemic changes in the “politics as usual” in America. They are campaigning to redeem Abraham Lincoln’s “radical” ideal of an American “government of the people, by the people, and for [ALL] the people.”

If the “Grumpy Old Son Of A Beach” is right and voters continue wasting their votes on two corporate-vetted political parties “who will not even make a dent,” in the domestic woes of “soccer moms” and “Joe the plumber” and whose foreign policy in the “war on terror” is dictated by the American representatives of a miniscule country on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, they should not be at all surprised to look out their window one morning to see Cliff taking Mutley for a stroll . . . and piles of dog pooh on their lawn.


Robert Weitzel, MWC NEWS editor, is an educator and freelance writer who lives in Madison, Wisconsin. His essays regularly appear in The Capital Times of Madison.
other articless by this auhor: http://mwcnews.net/Robert-Weitzel 


This_Category
Category:: Op_ed

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1025

Comments (2)
RSS comments
1. 20-10-2008 14:55
Good article here! 
If every voter who admits that Nader is right on the issues voted for him, he'd win. 
 
There is a choice. In Vermont there are 8 candidates for president on the ballot, plus the write-in option. I bet that 90%+ will vote for more of the same and then for the next 4 years, have voters remorse. 
 
The voters have the ultimate responsibility for the war, the economy, the environment, 18,000 deaths per year from lack of access to health care, etc. Voters like to blame the politicians who would not be in power if they had not been voted into Office in the first place.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
2. 24-10-2008 14:07
OBAMA or McCain, more of the same
Maybe I am forgetting something but thought since we were not actually attacked by either Iraq or Afghanistan both were Bush doctrine wars, possibly technically in violation of the geneva conventions. The thought entered my mind that Obama was going to esclate military more than McCain. McCain will not inspire the youth and minorities to enlist. This wolf in sheeps clothing that would do this for Imperislism and military expansionism turns my stomache. Not to mention Obamas corperate favoring voting record, bankruptcy law, helping Lieberman overcome anti war Ted Lamont, immunity to the telecommunication companies for spying on americans, and voting against a cap on credit card coompanies of 30% interst max on purchances. The vote for change we can hope for is an expansion of the Bush doctrine. I can not believe those any thing but Bush people are falling for it, I actually think McCain would be less of Bush, but still the same lines of destruction. If I follow what is right I have to give my vote to Nader. I like McKinney except I feel she comes across a bit arrogant and it turns me off. In principle she is worth consideration. I really think Nader has what it takes, so win or loose I have to exercise my free speech rights and vote for Nader.
Guest

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:

Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Robert Weitzel Nader McKinney Vote Lincoln Radical Ideal
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: