|
A peace activist in Maine said recently:
"There's only an inch of difference between Bush and Kerry, but in that inch are precariously perched the lives of thousands of people."
Even if that were true, that would be enough, since the lives of so many are at stake. But it's incomplete. It's untrue. To say there's little or no difference is simply to ignore a range of issues: funding for rental subsidies for low-income, working-class families; international aid for projects that include family planning and birth control; cleaner factory and auto emission standards; the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and the Landmines treaty; funding for a whole new generation of nuclear weapons. All of those are issues where Kerry's position is clearly, far and away better than George Bush. Kerry's voting record and public statements on each one of those issues is clear. Which one of those doesn't matter to you? Any one of those issues will either save lives or improve the quality of some lives under a Kerry administration. Under a Kerry administration fewer people will be hurt.
I asked it before and ask it again: after you have declared there's no difference and IF George Bush wins, will you go stand in line at a homeless shelter and tell someone who has lost their apartment because they lost their subsidy that "there's no difference." Will you go to a family with kids suffering from asthma exacerbated by offending smokestacks in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic States and say, "there's no difference." Will you volunteer your time for an aid project in a poverty-stricken area of the world, caring for children born to women with no access to family planning and birth control and tell them "there's no difference." How about buying a leg-prosthesis for a child who stepped on a landmine that would have been banned under the treaty our current President has refused to support?
But there are two more issues for progressives:
1. Kerry is part of a party that has within it people like Dennis Kucinich and Barbara Lee. It's the party of local candidates like Richard Rhames and Andrea Boland. George Bush has a party that has within it Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum. The Democrats do indeed support plenty of corporate-purchased policies, but they also have within the party a core of progressive values that if we turn our back we risk seeing weaker, not stronger. There are good people who aren't within the Democratic Party too, but without Instant Runoff Voting and with our current Electoral College system for Presidential races, the choices are simply not the same in the Presidential race as with local or state races.
2. A Presidential election is not the end-all-be-all. We don't expect Utopia from any election. We have to mobilize and grow our progressive movement now and far beyond the election. We cannot expect any national candidate to embrace a more progressive agenda until we have more people with us. What plans do people have for January 2005... and beyond? That's where our focus has to be.
This is a long-haul effort and if we run it like it's a short dash we'll burn out and lose what effort we've built.
I will vote for Kerry, without apology but also without illusion.
Following, then, are talking points for progressives for voting for Kerry:
Reasons to Elect John Kerry & John Edwards on Nov. 2
1. John Kerry has an outstanding environmental, women's rights, labor, etc. voting record in the U.S. Senate. Kerry may be the best major presidential candidate ever on environmental issues.
2. John Kerry met with Dennis Kucinich (after Kucinich's endorsement on July 20) and told him "in a Kerry administration, the White House will be the Department of Peace."
3. The U.S. is in bad shape after 3 ½ years. We have to get Bush out before we lose more civil liberties, environmental regulations, etc.
4. The world is in worse shape after U.S. Government decision to invade Iraq. We need real international intelligence and cooperation. Get Bush out, elect Kerry-Edwards.
5. We need Kerry elected, not a protest vote. Four more years of Bush may mean an even more severe crippling of democracy and freedom in the U.S.
6. Kerry's public saber rattling is a (misguided) political strategy to draw-in moderates in order to win the election. We need to show that progressives also are here and have more to offer.
7. Dennis Kucinich is supporting John Kerry for President. Do they agree on every issue? No. But at least they talk to each other. Kucinich says a Kerry win will "give progressives a direct line to the White House".
8. Howard Dean is supporting John Kerry for President. So is Jesse Jackson, Tom Hayden, John Conyers, Barbara Lee, and other progressives.
9. The U.S. Supreme Court could have up to 30% turnover in the next 4 years. Bush appointments could reverse many of the gains we've made in the past 100 years and have an adverse effect that could last for generations.
10. Our country is hurtling towards fascism. We need to do whatever we can to try to stop it. Is Kerry perfect? No! But he's the only hope we've got to get Bush and his cronies out of the White House. Does voting for Kerry mean we stop pushing for a progressive agenda? No! Our job will continue in any case. But with Democrats in power, we at least stand a chance of making some progress.
Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
