Constructive gadfly
Published on June 20, 2004 By stevendedalus In Politics
 
First and foremost the voter should analyze which presidential candidate is more likely to get our troops home sooner than later and to put an end to the wasteful spending on a foreign country’s infrastructure and nebulous political system. Further, the voter should probe whether the terror in Iraq is due to national insurgents or Al Qaeda and in either case what caused it and which candidate can best terminate this runaway train.

 The voter should not consider the current foreign policy without questioning ways in which the candidates will deal with North Korea, Ir an, Israel and Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and forgotten Afghanistan. Moreover, multinational corporations are very much an integral facet of foreign policy and the candidates should show an acumen for keeping them in check, let alone what to do about undue dependence on Mideast oil.

 The voter’s observations should not overlook the status of the quality of the US job market and look for answers from the candidates in how to improve the dignity and purchasing power of the nation’s labor force; and in a time of conflict making it essential to maintain a powerful industrial base able to mobilize on a dime in a crisis.

The voter should bring to mind the state of the nation’s health and decide which candidate is more apt in addressing the debacle of escalating health costs and the undeniable fact that taxpayers are carrying the load for the uninsured. Also the voter should expect the candidates to address the perennial disaster of one unable to apply for insurance because of pre-existent illness and those summarily losing insurance because of layoffs.

Homeland security should be on the voter’s agenda with respect to the extent of the Czar’s power to extend security at our ports, sports arenas, railways, bridges, tunnels, and trucking, along with greater funding to first responders in our major cities. Further, the voter should expect there be a ban on passenger planes and trains carrying cargo. Neither should the voter allow the candidates to avoid the matter of a super intelligence director coordinating all law enforcement agencies, nor the need for greater manpower and technology for border control.


The voter should demand that the candidates offer a plan in dramatically reducing the horrendous debt — generating debate on tax issues — that will otherwise be left to future generations to fight off foreclosures by foreign investors.


Next on the list is education: a hard reassessment of NCLB is in order, and the voter should expect a more holistic approach in depth rather than the narrow program of ferreting out “failing schools.”

The voter should demand a debate on the status of the armed services and whether a draft is in the making or an improvement in recruitment incentives.

The voter should also decide which candidate will improve or restrict free trade, particularly where US jobs are at stake.

As for cultural issues — gay marriage, abortion, gun control, school vouchers, decency code, religion and such — the voter should put them on the back burner for another time.


Copyright © 2004 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: June 20, 2004.


Comments
on Jun 21, 2004
Does this mean you're voting for Nader?
on Jun 22, 2004
No, too realistic for that!
on Jun 22, 2004
This is a good list! I still think you should be president, though, and I'll be in charge of homeland security!
on Jun 22, 2004
p.s. if Hillary Clinton were running, would you vote for her?
on Jun 22, 2004
I'm glad she's not. Still too close to the baggage. However, I would not hesitate to vote for her if she threw in the hat. I just wish Nader would drop out--his self-destruct attitude is not helping. WF is a good choice for homeland security. By the way, Kerry should offer Nader a job in consumer affairs.
on Jun 22, 2004
What I don't understand is why Ralph Nader hasn't tried to build a resume of congressional politics. Why does he have to run for president and lose when he could probably run for congress in New England or New York and win as an independent like Bernie Sanders. Is he afraid it would tarnish his reputation as an outsider? Guess what, Ralph, if you ever got into the White House you'd be the biggest insider of them all. Better be prepared to deal with a whole lot of people you don't agree with.

That said, a vote for Nader is a vote for 'the system is fucked'. Nobody wins any position with such a negative message. Nothing against Ralph Nader personally. He is vastly more policy-intensive than Bush, although his committment to Christian values and sinlessness is recognizably lacking, and his whining does not excite me so much as Bush's awkward power theatrics and frightened monkey stare, which are precisely what we should want other nations to view as the face of America.
on Jun 23, 2004

Bush's awkward power theatrics and frightened monkey stare, which are precisely what we should want other nations to view as the face of America.

Great imagery but I'm not sure we would want others to view us in Bush's image.

Nader wants to start at the top even though he has a snowball's chance in hell. I agree, long ago he should have run for congress; I guess he knew he was too much of a smart ass to be effective. Still, I have to admire him for his past efforts in keeping industry on its toes.

 

on Jun 23, 2004
Why is school vouchers a cultural issue and not an educational issue?

This is a good article that raises many important issues.

on Jun 23, 2004
Culture and education are the same thing. It all has to do with the values that schools are teaching our children. We don't send our kids to school just to develop them socially or provide them with important intellectual skills, we also send them to learn values such as respect for authority, respect for God, and segregation from liberals who could confuse them.
on Jun 30, 2004
The concept of school vouchers is clearly cultural; just look at Mediatiator's view 
respect for God, and segregation from liberals who could confuse them.
The long standing policy is that religious instruction is for parochial schools and the option of parents willing to pay for it. The clamor today for vouchers is to escape the "riff-raff' in public schools.