portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

government

Nader's St. Louis debate snalysis

Well, the second Presidential debate is over, and where do you start and where do you end?
President Bush—again—refused to admit he's made any mistakes when a citizen asked him to do so. His whole Presidency is a mistake, from Tallahassee to the Supreme Court. But it's the way he deceives the public: he goes after a health care plan by Kerry by saying it would "lead to rationing and ruin the quality of health care", that's his exact words. Medicare doesn't do that. Is he against Medicare? What ruins the quality of health care in America is massive medical malpractice that's taking over 80,000 lives and hundreds of thousands of injuries a year, according to the Harvard School of Public Health. It's those commercial HMO's that ration health care by their gigantic price schemes and billing frauds. It's the drug companies that ration health care especially with the eldery, who are faced with the prospect of paying rent or buying food or paying sky-rocketing prices for their medicines.

Kerry, again and again, failed to really nail George W. Bush, partly because he's on the same page. He could have nailed him on the Patriot Act. Instead he said he voted for the Patriot Act but he didn't like the way that John Ashcroft was enforcing it. Hello? The Patriot Act is the instrument that gives John Ashcroft the unconstitutional authority, in my judgement, to enforce sneak-and-peek searches, arrests without charges, imprisonment without lawyers, etc....

He could have nailed Bush on Bush's attempt constantly to take away the rights of millions of Americans who are wrongfully injured and defrauded to have their day in court. And Kerry backed off, saying HE was for some tort reform, he was for some caps. He couldn't even stand up for the huge casualties in this country from defective products, toxic pollution and, of course, medical malpractice.

Kerry could have challenged him when he said he wanted less regulation. "Oh, Mr. President? Less law and order for the corporate crime, fraud, and abuse that's looted and drained trillions of dollars in the last five years from millions of workers, their pensions, their 401k's?" You'd think that Kerry would raise the whole issue of cracking down on corporate crime; raised the issue of high gasoline and heating prices—about which Bush hasn't done a thing, except take big money from his oil company buddies in Texas for his campaign.

Lurking behind many of the topics—so-called tort reform, taxes, jobs, health care, oil, Iraq—is a subject none of them want to talk about: TOO MUCH CORPORATE POWER. Business Week thinks there's too much corporate power, but not John Kerry or George W. Bush. Kerry talks about the middle class being squeezed. How about the tens of millions of poor people that he never refers to in his speeches? Always the middle class, which is being squeezed into the poor classes.

I think what we've seen in this debate is too much similarity. Both of them are war-hawks on Iraq now: they both want to pursue the war, expand the war, drive to victory—as if there can be victory by a US military/corporate occupation of Iraq. People everywhere are like the Iraqis—they don't like to be occupied and they're never going to give up.

Of course nothing is ever said about Israel and the Palestine issue because they're both on the same page there, supporting the Israeli government's militaristic brutalization of the West Bank and Gaza instead of supporting the broad and deep Israeli peace movement that has worked out a two-state accord with their Palestinian counterparts.

homepage: homepage: http://naderoregon.org

weeeeeeeee 10.Oct.2004 22:09

ha

thanks for posting.