[Am-info] Re: Global Resistance at home

[Mitch Stone]

--- From a message sent by Felmon Davis on 11/6/01 2:23 PM ---

>is there some reading disease going around, maybe called 
>'decontextualitis' or the inclination to take words out of context 
>and react to them?
>
>there surely _is_ an issue of integrity here that has absolutely 
>nothing to do with whether we should have an n-party system where n > 
>2.
>
>it would be a matter of integrity for Nader to admit that, contrary 
>to his assertions, the election of Bush _does_ make a difference, and 
>so his campaign made a contribution to producing this difference. if 
>you also think he should admit the difference is for the worse, then 
>you might want honest reflection from him in the aftermath about 
>whether what he did was a good idea. 
>
>what does this have to do with the Constitution and the two-party 
>system? 

Back off there, Felmon. Curiously, Glenn did not take as much exception 
to my comments as you have.

I don't know what Nader asserted, and I don't think it matters. The 
question on the floor was whether Nader should have altered or abandoned 
his campaign once it became clear that his candidacy might contribute to 
the election of George Bush. I think this argument is predicated on a 
flawed assumption -- that Nader was running as a "fallen Democrat;" that 
he wasn't actually running as the standard-bearer of a third party.

I don't think Ralph Nader owes anybody any "reflection," honest or 
otherwise. I haven't heard Al Gore "reflect" on his botched campaign, 
have you?

 Mitch Stone  
 mitch@accidentalexpert.com