It is good to send aid to quake victims. But it cannot stop terrorists and nukes.

What people of Bam didn't suffer in hands of leaders of 'rogue state' of Iran, was inflicted on them by an earthquake. So city of about 80,000 souls had her population reduced by half by fateful hand of 'nature.' But I am not going to talk of miracles. Like unearthing of a man in a closet after two weeks. No, doctors had better explain that.

I am only interested in how this member of infamous 'Axis of Evil' suddenly became beloved country after disaster.

Not that this was only sin of Iran. Back in day, country had taken hostage of Americans. This Islamic state had also been guilty of gross human rights violations. And it is fingered to be hiding nukes--make it weapons of mass destruction. This is besides several alleged terrorists' hideouts in that 'outlaw regime.' But now, thank God for earthqake. Because what man would neither achieve by declaring Year of Peace nor by praying for peace in Rome, is going to be brought about by maddening of earth.

There was general sympathy for Iran after quake. All country's enemies came to her rescue. Even one of her obdurate enemies sent large sums of money, relief materials and disaster management experts to Iran. That country even planned to send a high level representatio to Iran, but this was randomly rebuffed.

The disenfranchised sit out this dance and pray for miracles. We ignore a simple and obvious political solution and exit from two party merry- go- round. Let disenfranchised vote for no other than third party candidates for next twenty years, or however long it takes to be rid of this two party abomination.

How many of today's Democrats and Republicans would be so if they believed any third party candidate had a near equal chance of election? Instead of using political gangs or machines to dominate world with ideas that belong to a bloody past, why not try to get most reasonable, intelligent and ethical leadership from all these relatively unknown and unadvertised political parties? The fact that third parties and their platforms are relatively obscure, is proof of a woefully ignorant electorate that will continue to choose perceived lesser of two evils when good is a clear option.

Why isn't Public Broadcasting Corporation telling public about third party options for meaningful politics? Is this waiting for full implementation of multi- channel programming by this corporation? Perhaps there are no plans by any popular media organizations/corporations to support multi-party, multi-dimensional politics. Is Master plan two dimensional politics forever?

Any Democrat or Republican candidate for office who cannot defend and debate merits of third party platforms and planks are not fit to hold public office. Their knowledge is proven too specialized to be trusted with many decisions. Members of third parties should be asking two party candidates where they stand on third party issues. In California's recent recall election, I think Green Party candidate had best of published ideas. Yet "progressive" California voters still dance to two party tune. If California indicates where we are headed in national politics, we've been there for two centuries. Where is progress?