1. Voting for Nader is the only way we can vote against the war.

2. The war issue trumps all other issues. While Native Americans like Winona LaDuke and most African-Americans endorse Kerry because they will no doubt get a better deal from Democrats, the condition of Iraqis, Palestinians and most of the world are worse. We should do the most for the greatest number. The war issue supercedes abortion rights, court appointments, constitutional rights and all other issues put together because this war can go on for decades, spread to other countries, cost mega-billions and affect domestic issues. US minorities especially will pay in blood and cuts in social services.

3. A Kerry victory will stop all effective activism against the war and other injustices. If Bush gets re-elected, a groundswell of activism like the 60's can be predicted. All the Bush haters will be pissed. If Kerry gets elected, the anti-war demonstrators will be the same small group of protesters we've always had. The other liberals will celebrate their victory, and go back to their TV stupor, and expect things to get better. The movement will be killed. For example, during Daddy Bush's term, a large Save-Our-Cities movement marched on Washington against urban decay and poverty. As soon as Clinton was elected, the movement abruptly died. Did the cities get what they needed? No! The same movement death can be expected if Kerry gets elected. Without a mobilized citizenry, the war machine will continue. Peace-lovers, who back Kerry with the hope that massive anti-war sentiment will nudge him after he is elected, are unrealistic. Masses will not fill the streets against Kerry's war, try as we may, but they will against Bush's war. Kerry would be stuck in the quagmire. Europe and the UN will not go into Iraq with Kerry. Will he then pull out the troops? Not likely. Here's why:

4. John Kerry and many liberals including Green Party members like David Cobb say we cannot "cut and run" from Iraq for humanitarian reasons. Senator Byrd is the only one in all the Congress who disagrees. Everyone else says we have to fix what was destroyed and prevent a civil war. Accordingly, the US Army will be in Iraq for decades trying to do the impossible. The insurgents do not want us there and they destroy infrastructure faster than the US can fix it. Insurgents multiply faster than the US can kill them. It is a lost cause. The US cannot fix Iraq or stop a civil war. Ralph Nader is the only candidate with the sense to know this. Even if Kurds, Sunnis and Shities would kill each other, the US should get out immediately. Eventually the Iraqis, hopefully with the help of the Arab League, OPEC, UN and anti-war European governments, will make peace and stability on their own terms. The credibility of the US is shot and cannot help at all, except to send money through the UN, no strings attached.

5. If Kerry gets elected, he will have a mandate for war. Why? Because he will be elected by over 50% (a majority) on a pro-war platform. If Bush gets elected, he probably will not get over 50% because his opposition will probably be split between Kerry, Nader, Cobb and others. Hence, a re-elected Bush will NOT have a mandate for war, having probably received less than a majority of votes cast. In other words, If Kerry is elected with 55% of the votes cast on a pro-war platform, he can justify a military policy in Iraq. If Bush gets re-elected with 48% of the votes cast, he cannot claim a mandate to do what he wants.

6. John Kerry is more anti-Palestine than Bush is. The Israeli occupation is one of the main causes of the attacks on Israel and on the US. A Kerry presidency will guarantee more retaliation against Israeli and US state terrorism in the Middle East.

Kerry is not better. Vote for peace. Vote for truth. Vote for principle. Vote for Ralph Nader, come what may! Be proud to spoil the two-party corporate stranglehold on the US and the world!

(Baltimore, Oct. 28, 2004)