Could I? Would I? Should I? Vote for...Nader?

Could I? Would I? Should I? Vote for... Nader?

What a contrast it is--a little over a month ago I vowed I would never vote for Ralph "kill the Corvair" Nader, his bloody-eyed socialism, his eco-crat Green Party, his obvious 'New World Order' agenda, his pro-abortion, pro-affirmative action, pro-politically correct-speech crapola, or anything else that idiot Green Part stood for, such as taking away private property unless a bunch of tree-huggers lived on it...and no, I don't hug trees as a matter of course (though once I did, since I wanted to see how far my arms went around it: the huge Ponderosa pine was humongous!).

In fact, I wasn't gonna vote for anyone. I WILL NOT, CAN NOT, NOW or EVER, vote for blood and Gore. Big Al, Liar-in-Chief Wanna-be--an even bigger liar than Slick!--cannot be brooked in any way, shape or form, anytime, anywhere, anyhow! The USA has had enough Lyin' Kings! So, the way I see it (and, God, I hope most Americans!), Algore can take his Internet, Buddhist temple, (and, according to at least one TV commercial, his pants) and go shove it, no 'hate speech' intended.

I won't vote for Pat Buchanan--though I know a few like-minded individuals who will--because here is a guy who only manages to surface before Presidential elections to get himself before the public eye. For why do you think Buchanan did that gig he did in Seattle against the World Trade Organization? Because he really cares about free-trade and American sovereignty? And could one ever forget--I can't--seeing him on the PBS show Crossfire playing fiery conservative against, well, I can't remember who played the liberal, but Mr. Pat acted--well, like some kinda demagogue. A Huey Long on steriods. Here is a guy who plays outsider but really is an insider, a Freemason of very high degree, and someone who knows his way around Washington almost as well as Gore or Dubya...or Nader, for that matter. Now I know the major media rails about Buchanan, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there is a bit of 'strong delusion' about Mr. Pat. He is not what he seems (in fact, he is the perfect Reform Party successor to the traitorous H. Ross Perot, who nearly singlehandedly ruined Texas public schools).

No offense to Harry Browne, another one who like-minded individuals say they could vote for. But his Libertarian Party has had--how many years?--to bring the US back to its founding father roots, and has abysmally failed. A vote for Browne is a wasted vote. And a vote for those other minor third parties, all God-knows-how-many of them, is likewise.

That leaves Ralph Nader, who I really have little in agreement with--except this:

Nader has done what Buchanan only pays lip-service to--gotten the multinational corporations and the power elites who back them really pissed off, consistently, not just during election years. Nader really does stand for 'small is better', and this can be extrapolated to mean that Nader, through experience not rhetoric, really knows what it takes to reduce the size of government.
Nader knows he cannot hope to win without drawing in conservatives, the middle-America types, and so, in line with his 'small is better' theme, is the only candidate who takes a 'no-wing' approach to woo-ing the electorate. I have advocated in this e-zine that it is time for left and right to unite against the power elites, and Nader is the only candidate who has advocated the same thing.
The major media hate Nader since he will take votes from their boy Al (and, they presume, hand Bush the Presidency). That is enough reason to consider voting for Nader--particularly since (presumably) you can put Dubya in the White House this way and keep Gore out--without actually going out and voting for Bush! BTW, I could scrap all this and vote for Bush. But I won't vote for Dubya either. About the only issue Bush and I agree on is support for Homeschooling, but Dub wants to give all homeschooling families (he says) $5,000 per year for materials and the like: which means Dubya wants the federal government to get its hands on America's only real option to stop the slide of youth into government-sponsored brainwashing; this, of course, would kill the homeschooling movement! Bush, like Clinton and Gore and other politicians, are not very sound in the morality department, and is known to lie when he needs to. Finally, the fact that, all of a sudden, Bush reverses his principled stand on getting the troops out of Kosovo and Bosnia proves beyond a shoadow of a doubt that Dubya is a slave of the power elites. He will not stand on his own and defend freedom in the US--he will do what Daddy (read-my-lips: New World Order) Bush tells him to!
Nader may be socialist, pro-abortion, pro-eco-crat, pro-affirmative action and a lot of other things I can't stand, but he is the ONLY anti-war, anti-multinational corporation, anti-power elite, pro-smaller government candidate we have to choose from this time around who actually has a chance of winning, and stands a great chance in effecting the outcome.

Back to OmegaZine!