[Am-info] Re: Global Resistance at home

[Mitch Stone]

--- From a message sent by Felmon Davis on 11/6/01 4:33 PM ---

>sorry, I didn't intend to sound like I was being hostile or anything, 
>I was only going for emphasis. I must have struck the wrong note. my 
>apologies to you.

Accepted.

>> 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.
>>
>
>no, the assumption is that he wanted to promote certain _issues_ - 
>the raisons d'etre of his party.
>
>if I thought running for office would thwart my causes, I shouldn't 
>do it.

Well I think you have it in a nutshell there. The purpose of running for 
office is, or at least should be, to advance a political agenda.

>> 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?
>>
>
>Al Gore owes a _lot_ of reflection, a lot of it! Wow!

Maybe, but you'll probably never hear it. Politicians rarely admit their 
mistakes, even when they might be better off if they did.

>I'm against any third party in a circumstance where it leads to 
>disaster. There's nothing holy about the idea of an n-th party. the 
>important thing is promoting the issues you care about.
>
>I know, some people's issue _is_ that there be an n-th party. that 
>seems bizarre to me but so be it. 
>
>Again, I hope I'm not shouting, just tapping the table for emphasis.

I come from the position that the current two-party system _is_ a 
disaster.

 Mitch Stone  
 mitch@accidentalexpert.com