Hillary v. Rudy in 08? Why that line-up makes me sad

Leonard Carrier, DW’s In-House Historian and Philosopher, responding to an article in The Nation, by Jon Wiener, shares with us his considerable angst at America’s being force-fed two unpalatable presidential entre’s in our next…very crucial Presidential election.

It’s a sad commentary on our political process that we will likely see Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani contending for the presidency in 2008. What that shows is that cash is king, and the corporate cash is flowing towards those whom it believes it can control.

Michael Moore’s "Sicko" shows how Hillary veered to the right after she failed in her bid to reform health care. If she gets elected, you can kiss a single-payer health care plan goodbye, and you can say "hello" to increased privatization of whatever remains of our third-world health care system. If Giuliani were to get elected we would get even worse–perhaps another invasion to benefit "big oil."

Why are our journalists and pundits concerned with how much money Hillary, Rudy, or Barack are raising–or how much Edwards pays for his haircuts? Why aren’t they publicizing the Conyers-Kucinich health care bill (HR 676) that would put everyone under Medicare? It’s hard not to be cynical in seeing our media and our "pundits" as part of the same, corrupt political process that will offer us the choice of Clinton or Giuliani in 2008. Now that’s what’s really meant by a "Hobson’s choice."

The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just. — A. Lincoln

Len Carrier
8 1 07