[lazysmurff]

so im writing an op-ed for the school newspaper, and i thought to myself "what better critics than the guys in the politics forum on AF. their smart, i'll get all sides oppinions etc etc etc." so here you go, feel free to edit, critique, argue with or against....you know, the usual.
------------------------------------------------------------------

We’ve all seen the blind taste test commercials touting how the American public, when given just the “the facts” and no labels or names, picked this beer over that one, or this soda over this other one. It is in this vein that I wish to perform my own taste test of sorts. I’m going to present to you Presidential Candidate X. Mr. X is a white male Christian, graduated from an Ivy League school, has a questionable military service record, and is incredibly wealthy, though not by any fault of his own. Mr. X, while in office, has demonstrated a lack of concern for civil rights, including support for the US PATRIOT Act. He also supports the continuation of the war in Iraq (and maybe even an increase of troop presence) as well a supporting a continuation of the war on our rights (also known as the “war on terror”). He does not support the rights of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transsexuals) to marry. While Mr. X. verbally supports the commitment to alternate fuels and a preservation of the environment, he also supports the dramatic increase of spending on the industrial military complex that serves to destroy this environment he claims to protect. Mr. X. also supports such things as the death penalty, the continued embargo on communist Cuba and continued trade with communist China. Would you vote for candidate X? I wouldn’t either.
The fact of the matter remains, however, that the vast majority of those of you who vote, will be voting for this candidate because the above description fits not only the incumbent Mr. Bush, but the contender, Mr. Kerry, as well. It is strange how similar these two men are, not only in their ultra privileged upper crust lifestyles, but also in their politics.
The solution, my fellow voters, is not to be found in the Republi-crat party that now holds power, but rather in the lower ranks of the political parties. Those names below John and George, the ones labeled “Socialist”, “Libertarian”, “Green” and the like, are our only salvation short of violent overthrow. Yes, citing your intentions to vote third party will undoubtedly receive responses such as “Not voting for Kerry is a vote for Bush.” and “Not voting for Bush is a vote for Kerry.” So which one is it? Or is it just that that sentiment has been beaten into our heads by the popular media for so long that we have come to believe we are wasting our votes if we don’t vote for the major party that runs America. MTV’s Rock the Vote will be a stark example of this (un?)intentional brainwash. You will be told that you have a voice, and to at least vote for something, but the only choices you will be presented with is the Republi-crat party and its two contenders, Bush and Bush-lite.
It’s time, my friends, for us to take a stand. We can either support the less than mediocre “toe the party line” candidates we will be forever presented with, or we can find a party that better represents our views. We can choose to follow the herd, and perpetuate this cycle of “one party, two faces” tyranny. Or we can choose to take a stand against the popular, and let our voices truly be heard. Some will tell you that this election is too import to be taking a stand like this, that ousting the incumbent (or keeping him in) is too vital at this point in our history to risk losing the election because of third parties. I ask, what better time to make a statement? With all eyes on this election, what better chance for those of us dissatisfied with the current face of national politics to stand up and be heard? The constitution reads “We the people” , not “We the Republicans and Democrats”. This is our country. Let’s take it back.