WHAT IS IT WITH THE AMERICAN VOTER BY J. MOORE(03.03.04)
|
WHY AM I THINKING OF VOTING FOR RALPH NADER? Most people are probably tired of Ralph. Not me. Already the media has begun to demonize him. The hardcore Democrats who hate Bush have one mantra, "Go away Ralph."
The media has begun to paint Ralph as self-absorbed and egotistic-might could hang many monikers on Ralph but being self-absorbed ain't one of them. The guy doesn't even have a car, lives in an apartment, and dresses like his clothes came from Goodwill. I mean, give me a break!
Ralph embodies those issues which should be important to Americans who care. And, trust me, I don't think all Americans care; look at how many vote.
I think Walt Rowstow who died not long ago had it right. Although he was referring to politicians, I think his view has merit to Americans in general. He says that if a politician wants to accomplish something, he needs to get 60% of the people for him. 25% will be against everything and 15% are out to lunch. Sound good? The only percentage I think I would change is the "out to lunch" one-maybe it is at least 25-35%.
Why do caring Americans not embrace someone like Ralph? Because he can't win! What kind of an excuse is that? MOST AMERICANS ARE STUPID. I've been wanting to say this for such a long time.
I've fantasized that I'm running for office and I'm at one of the debates and get a chance at an opening statement and say, "Most voters are stupid," let's face it. I don't mean they are dumb, simply stupid. They are like a bunch of lambs led around, many not even that smart. They elect the same politicians; go for a "party" line without any thought of what is best for the country.
I asked my own daugher once why she voted for a certain candidate who was an obvious crook by almost anyone's definition. Her answer, "His was the only name on the ballot I knew." Now that is an intelligent voter.
At least Ralph knows the important issues and chases them. I would think that Howard Dean and other Democrats who claim to be idea people, but didn't make the cut, would be embracing his ideas and not joining the chorus of "Go away Ralph." He's "right on" about most of the issues that Dean's demoniacs touted.
Without Ralph, it is more of the same: same politicians, doing anything to get elected, wielding power like a King-stupid decisions and pandering to the ones with the most money. Go Ralph!!!!!!!!!!!
Nothing is more irritating to me that for the media or politicians or government officials, whoever, to think that I am stupid. But, they might as well think all of us are stupid, based on how we vote and where we contribute our money. I've contributed to various political parties, I confess, but Ralph has a better idea. Campaigns should be publicly financed. This keeps the money out of politics. Dean spent eleven million in Iowa alone.
Ralph is too idealistic. Well, that's what Ralph is: idealistic. We had eight years of Bill, almost four of George W. and what we can say about them both: they are not idealistic. And, look where it has gotten us. Way to go American voter!
If we want more of the same: big money talking, then it is the status quo. It is precisely what the Republicans and Democrats offer. We would like to think that big money doesn't drive who we elect but it does. Come on! George Bush breezes into California and raises five mil, in a state who wouldn't give him politically the time of day. People pay two grand for a hotdog. Who are these people? Well, to me, they are a chorus of the stupid people.
Does Ralph have a chance? No! Why would he run? I think he runs because he believes his message. Look at his life. It is pretty refreshing to me to know that Ralph Nader has never even owned a car. Not even a Corvair.
|
|
RONALD REAGAN: THE GIPPER HAD TO EXIT SMILING BY J.LEIGH
|
"I have always believed in you and in what you could accomplish for yourselves and for others. And whatever else history may say about me when I'm gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not to our worst fears, to our confidence, rather than your doubts."
Ronald Reagan
It would have been very hard not to be moved this week during at least one of former President Reagan's various tributes. I was most moved by two photographs this week: the one of the young Marine saluting the casket with no hands(lost in Iraq), and Nancy Reagan's last farewell to her husband in which she lay her head on the coffin.; at that moment, she was not the former president's wife, an enigmatic figure, but a grieving widow.
I was floating around the Army, Korea, and the 82d Airborne during the Reagan presidency. I met a former member of Reagan's administration after the Iran-Contra scandal, Oliver North, once at the General William C. Lee celebration in Dunn, NC where we were on the same program. I still remember the black notebook that he kept his speeches in: tabbed as to which one to use for what occasion. Ollie was a good Marine, obviously caught up in the politics of the National Security Council. I remember him telling me that what he hated most was that he lost his Marine career. He was a good Marine.
I think I remember the Iran-Contra scandal during this time more than anything because I always felt that Ollie was the ultimate scapegoat for merely doing his job. However, it made him a star and gave him another career so maybe his fall from grace was worth it, who knows.
Most of the press reports I've heard made Reagan a saint this week, that is, all but in California and San Francisco especially. What do we expect from one of the few places in America where one thinks about having to get a passport to enter? Why not give Reagan his due and more!
On NPR, many were calling up memories: one very funny one: Some staffer had given him all these notes to bone up on for some meeting the next day and the president comes in the next morning and they are all primed for his remarks and questions on their hard work and he announces he hasn't read the notes, he watched, The Sound of Music, on TV. Now, there is a president who has his priorities straight and I'm not kidding.
Reagan, by all accounts, saw the big picture; dismantling of the Berlin wall and ending the cold war, based on who you listen too. He had his nuances as a leader, but all in all, he was on top of it when the country needed him most. The NY Times seems to have hit the right theme with this statement: "Seventy -seven years old at the end of his presidency, he never lost his boyish charm or his ability to look Americans in the eye and make many feel good about themselves. 'America is back,' he told them, and his confidence made them confident.
Everybody didn't love the "Gipper" ; and if there is any doubt, some letters to the editor in the San Francisco Chronicle would dispel that doubt.-not that the letters are any big deal, but what would we expect-the letters often blamed him for the homeless problem as he cut back on housing and subsidies for the poor, and no funding for AIDS, etc. When in fact, this is not true: it is true that the mental institutions were closed; but the idea, which was not Reagan's, was a constituency that advocated the mentally ill be allowed more freedom in their own decision-making and who best to care for them than their communities. Guess what? The communities didn't want them and many ended up on the streets. A reasonably sounding idea which didn't work, but it wasn't Reagan's idea.
But Let's don't make him a saint; I'd rather reserve that for Ray Charles. And, to be honest, after having read and heard much more than I thought necessary about a good former governor and president, there really seems to have been two President Reagan's: one who was the American president and one who pretty much failed as a family man. The facts simply bear it out: this is not meant as criticism, maybe just humanity. It is life.
In a sense, a former president's family is the "poster child" for a dysfunctional family. All but one of them has written a "tell all" Memoir, detailing the disconnected family failures. He was estranged at one time or the other from each of his children. One actually changed her name not to be identified with him. All eventually reconciled and were with him when he died; and, throughout the funeral appeared to be extremely supportive.
To me, it appears that in many ways, Nancy, who is now being looked on as a saint herself for caring for him so well the last ten years in his Alzheimer's, actually appears to have isolated him from his children so he could be the president. Why is a mystery. In this regard, he sacrificed himself for the greater good. I'm not so sure-scores and scores, numbering in the thousands, at least, could be the president and do about as good a job as any. But, being a Dad is the greatest job in the world and not all can do that. I'm sorry Ronny missed much of it.
I don't know if the former president ever read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, but he could easily have been the principle character in it. Reagan was a combination of ideologue and man who knew how to be practical ,but above all, a man of unbending and unyielding principle. The former president was a crusader, battling against what he saw as government excesses. Like Ayn Rand's individuality, he preached a gospel of self-reliance.
The now deceased president who has ventured to the other side was not a saint, not even close, but he was a leader: optimistic with a deep conviction that we would triumph over our adversaries abroad and fulfill our destiny of being all that God would allow us to be. We surely need some of that optimism today. Maybe in celebration of his life in his death, now, we can recapture some of his enthusiasm. I hope and pray so.
|
|
|
