Me Three

The 2004 Summer Satire Contest

Home
About
Print Edition
Archives
Contact Us
Submit
Masthead
Links

Just 115 Days Left: Chasing Ambulances

By Mark Grueter

---------------------------------------

We missed a good deal over the past two weeks. John Edwards was obviously the best vice-presidential choice Kerry could have made. Those who suggest inarticulate, dull men like Dick Gephardt or Bob Graham would've been wiser choices are fools, liars or both. My hunch is that Kerry planned to pick Edwards from the very beginning but wanted to be as shrewd and diplomatic as possible with the actual process. He had to at least pretend that other candidates were being considered, if only for the sake of saving friendships. And of course, Kerry's people needed to be absolutely certain John Edwards was not involved in anything sinister in his spare time.

However, in their first week as a team, Kerry and Edwards delivered a series of meaningless stump speeches. Embraced in each other's arms, wearing big, stupid grins, the two threw out buzzwords and platitudes like "optimism," "hope," and "values" in what appeared to be an attempt to pander to dumb people. Politicians feel as though they have to debase themselves in order to be elected. Edwards is passionate and genuine, Kerry smooth and sagacious; if they simply speak naturally, and not from a list of talking points, they will persuade voters. In hard-hitting TV interviews, both men come across much better than they do when they're out on the trail groveling for votes.

Republicans pretend that just because some trial lawyers fit their dark characterization of "ambulance chasers," voters will assume Edwards is one himself, whatever that's supposed to mean. I find it hard to believe voters will hold Edwards' distinguished career against him. Chasing ambulances, after all, involves defending poor people against medical malpractice and corrupt businesses. Moreover, almost everybody knows Edwards only took on cases he truly believed in. And almost everybody knows the settlements he received on behalf of his clients were just. Something tells me that Americans won't think it's such a bad thing to have people out there willing to defend little girls who've had their intestines ripped out by unsafe swimming pool filters. I even heard some republicans criticizing Edwards for accepting payment for the services he provided to his clients. In investing his whole life in winning thousands for his clients, how dare the unscrupulous Edwards take a cut of up to 20%?

As Ralph Nader recently said: it's good for the democrats to be "in bed" with trial lawyers. Or, more specifically, with plaintiff's attorneys - people who sue powerful corporations on behalf of ordinary, powerless citizens. While on the topic of Nader, he made mince meat of Howard Dean during a debate on Friday. Dean tried to persuade Nader to drop out of the race in order to ensure a Kerry victory. Nader proved two things: 1) If Kerry is half as smart as people think he is, he should have no problem winning regardless of a Nader campaign 2) Ralph Nader is much brighter and more knowledgeable than Howard Dean, and certainly worthy of high office. Dean cited the 90,000 Floridians who voted for Nader in 2000 as proof of Nader costing Al Gore the election. Nader pointed out that 800,000 Florida democrats voted for Bush on the same day. The point being that democrats should spend more time persuading members of their own party to vote for them and less time whining about and bashing an American hero, Ralph Nader, for appealing to independent-minded voters unsatisfied with the two-party system.

Moreover, Nader is the only serious candidate in the presidential race advocating a withdrawal from Iraq. Both Kerry and Edwards supported regime change in Iraq and so really Nader is the only legitimate anti-war candidate. That alone makes his candidacy important, ignoring for the moment all the other differences.

* * *

The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee released a report declaring that we went to war in Iraq based on false intelligence. With no sign of WMD and no evidence of an operational link between Saddam and al-Qaeda, the war in Iraq has become rather difficult to justify. US credibility in the world is at an all-time low (in a recent survey, 25% of Hungarians chose Adolf Hitler as their least favorite "foreign personality." George W. Bush finished a respectable second with 23% followed by Osama bin Laden at 16%). One can still offer up the justification that it was a humanitarian intervention, but given all the casualties, the poor planning, Abu Ghraib, the beheadings, and the secrecy and lying of the current presidential administration this does not sell. Iraq can still be salvaged but it will take years of careful work, and certainly a new administration committed to human rights, openness and honesty. I do think Kerry and Edwards are the right leaders to see it through.

* * *

I predict Fahrenheit 9-11 will have little effect on the election because the film does not present a coherent argument. Many interesting issues are raised but the film lacks any real elements of persuasion. Like all of Moore's films, the movie is entertaining partly because he's gifted at making people look stupid, even those he's trying to get you to sympathize with (i.e. the sobbing mother). But try to find one person who shifted his/her allegiance from Bush to Kerry or Nader after watching the film, then we can talk.

* * *

With the democrats bouncing up in the polls, Tom Ridge fatuously announced "new" indications of an impending terrorist attack on the homeland this summer. No specifics were given, of course, and so yet again nobody took the warning seriously. Would the Bush people really only do this in order to get the American people to rally round the president while stealing a headline or two away from Kerry and Edwards? It is hard to imagine otherwise. As far as dirty politics is considered, I fear this is just the start. The New Republic reports that members of the Bush administration are pressuring Pakistani officials to capture "High Value Targets" such as bin Laden or Taliban head Mohammed Omar before the November election. "The New Republic has learned that Pakistani security officials have been told they must produce HVTs by the election." It is naïve to think that in the struggle for power, seemingly good people are not capable of the most cynical, opportunistic and twisted actions.

Click here for Grueter's previous column.

---------------------------------------

Mark Grueter is a writer living in New York City. He can be contacted here.