From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #319 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, November 9 2000 Volume 09 : Number 319 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: too little, too late [Tom Clark ] Weekend at Mel Carnahan's ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: hello from the old country (third party call) [Aaron Mandel ] Polly-tics on the shore [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: Polly-tics on the shore [GSS ] Re: Polly-tics on the shore [Eleanore Adams ] Re: what a country 3 [steve ] Re: what a country 4 [steve ] Re: what a country 1 [steve ] Re: what a country 2 [steve ] Re: Polly-tics on the shore [steve ] Re: hello from the old country (third party call) ["Dee Adams" ] Re: what a country 4 [Terrence Marks ] for my part... ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] Re: what a country 4 [Eclipse ] RE: what a country 4 ["Brian Huddell" ] Re: what a country 4 [steve ] RE: what a country 4 [Terrence Marks ] really informative, quick-loading site about Florida discrepancies [Eb ] Nader: Response to Jim and Michael [The Great Quail ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 15:20:55 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: too little, too late on 11/8/00 1:42 PM, Eb at ElBroome@earthlink.net wrote: > Eb, wondering if this list will still be around in a decade or so, when > Hillary decides to run for President ;) While watching her acceptance last night I couldn't help thinking that she must want Bush to win. Then she would have a better chance of running - and winning - the presidency in 2004. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 15:22:08 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Weekend at Mel Carnahan's At 06:24 PM 11/8/00 -0500, Christopher Gross wrote: >Did I say my lucky frog-print boxers? I need more caffeine. Actually I >wore my lucky turtle-print boxers to vote, and the frog pair today, for >the Florida recount. Great. You know damn well frogs put out a Republican vibe. Just look at the Budweiser commercials. Thanks a lot for screwing over the entire country, Mr. Gross. You should have worn the kitties. - --Jason, getting his "IMPEACH GEORGE W. BUSH" bumper-stickers printed up as we speak "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 18:57:41 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: hello from the old country (third party call) On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Jim Davies wrote: > p.s. spot the Scott Miller connection - which song am I thinking of? "Throwing The Election". i had to go back and check which list i was reading this on when you name-dropped the Loud Family. a ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 18:12:20 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: Re: what a country > If this may be considered a reply, and not a new post, maybe I can > make this without sounding too much like I am breaking my word > already.... (Aha! The Greens think, just like Al Gore!) You voted for him. > And also, I am sorry if my last email was harsh and insulting. I have > been very very angry about this election, and it's been hard to keep Take two of these,,,, hey not those. Wow, that was the most acid I have ever seen anyone take. > a cool head. Please forgive me if I crossed the line and offered > personal insult to anyone -- and really, if you voted for Nader and > would have positively not voted for Gore, then I really can't blame > you for anything. Though I still don't see how any liberally can > truly not see any significant difference between Gore and Bush; but > that is another issue. There are numbers of things that people would like to believe are different, but the reality is insignificant. THEY BOTH FUCKING SUCK. > >You think the Dems are going to be upset at Gore? I think so, too. Just like the Reps were pissed at Perot. For every action there is an opposite but equal reaction, or something. It is like watching the UFC or any championship. I mean, who the fuck cares who wins, at least I don't anymore. > > Yes, of course, but really Jeme -- I think you are totally > underestimating the amount of anger Dems like me are feeling towards > Nader. I have been getting some pretty angry responses from other Dem > friends. The generally feeling is that he should be dropped into a > vat of quick-drying cement. You should have voted for him, then we wouldn't have this 'problem', would we? > You are right -- he ran a poor campaign. There is no doubt about > that. If he were stronger, he would have taken more Bush votes. My > post was a response to Vivien's letter, not a total analysis of why > Gore will probably lose. That has a lot to do with Gore's campaign > mistakes, the media's coverage, and the very disillusionment that dmw > touched upon. But according to most exit polls, Nader is an > undeniably a factor in his loss. > > >I, for one, could not vote for Gore. As I could not vote for Gore or Bush. The fact is, we are tired of the shit. Fuck the Republicans, fuck the Democrats. Viva Revolucion. > >He supports war and corporate > >control. Colombia, Kosovo, Iraq, WTO, IMF, & WIPO. Those are the only > >important issues. Roe v. Wade and affirmative action are band-aids for a > >society with no respect for individuals. > > Oh, give me a break. That's just insulting, and a very easy thing to > say for a fairly affluent, WASP heterosexual male living in Oregon. Wait a minute, he could bi. > >I'd vote for Buchanan over Bush or Gore for exactly > >these reasons. At least he work toward resolution of the global > >problems. We could fix the domestic problems he created later. > > You would have really voted for Buchanan? Well, what can I say? I > think that's just.... wow, I don't know. Your voting priorities are > very different from mine. You mean long term as opposed to short sighted? > Well, I agree with you on the first part -- It was harsh and > untenable. I am very angry. Believe it or not, I used to like Nader. > I have a lot of disillusionment here, too. I think he just acted > irresponsibly, serving only to harm the one group that he needed most > to cooperate with -- the Democratic left. Rather than staying in the > party as a gadfly or staying outside as an agitator, he ran a > short-sighted campaign that only served to alienate moderate > Democrats and seriously harm the left wing.As I recently told one > impassioned Nader supporter, your heart may be in the right place -- > but stubbornly sabotaging the Democrats' chance to maintain the > Presidency is a self-destructive act. It is a spoiler, nothing more, > and in the long run -- hell, the short run -- has served to alienate > the very people you need most for bigger support -- people who are > already Democrats. Replace left with right, Democrat with Republican, Nader with Perot and it reads like a script that was just passed from one end of the room to the other. > Yes, I say that stat too -- coming from Nader's office, or so I was > told. CNN tells a different story, and it varies across the states, > especially in Florida, where Nader really threw a spanner into the > works. I find it funny that Naderites seem so willing to mistrust and > bash everything not-Nader, and always so willing to forgive, excuse > and swallow anything Nadery. Nader is kickass. Everyone else sucked. How can that be hard to swallow? > If that helps you sleep at night through the next couple of > Republican years, so be it. And from what I understand, a lot of you > NaderFegs really are one issue voters -- the all-mighty Evil of > Corporations. > > I can tell you, I think this whole election is fucked, and like doug > says, please let this be the end of the Electoral College. It > certainly has made my mind up on that! But isn't that only because it looks like Gore got the popular but lost the electoral? Just yesterday you could hear the Republicans saying the same to the Democrats and the Democrats saying what the Republicans are saying today. Like little kids in the sand box. gssssssssssssssss.sssssssssssss's ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:50:41 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Polly-tics on the shore >p.s. spot the Scott Miller connection - which song am I thinking of? is the first word of the title "Throwing"? :) I know I've been more vocal on the US election than I should have been for an outsider but here's a point to consider from the south Pacific. The NZ public is pretty ambivalent about Gore, Bush, and Lieberman. Most NZers, however, hate Cheney. The reason? When NZ went nuclear-free in the 1980s, it was Defense Sesretary Cheney who tried to use strong-arm tactics on us to accept bombships in our ports. He was responsible for many of the policy decisions (such as trade embargoes and cold-shouldering us on international agreements). It has even been reported that he wanted to instigate the overthrow of our government. Forget countries that are openly hostile to the US - here was a government official who wanted to overthrow an *ally*s government, simply because it disagreed with one policy decision (one which, on its own, would have made little difference to the US's defence policies. If the US defence policy hinges on bringing a nuclear-powered ship into Auckland harbour, God help the free world!) >Eb, wondering if this list will still be around in a decade or so, when >Hillary decides to run for President ;) that long? Oh, and hypothetically, like... I know a president can't run for a third term in that office, but is there anything to stop a two-term pres standing as a running-mate for VP? oh and another question from an 'outsider'. What is a GOP? For that matter, what (apart from the nickname of a state and a singer about bananas) is a hoosier? James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 21:30:11 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: Re: Polly-tics on the shore > public is pretty ambivalent about Gore, Bush, and Lieberman. Most NZers, > however, hate Cheney. I think everyone hates Cheney. I developed a particular dislike for the guy sometime around the gulf war. I fucking hate those 'need to know bastards'. > that long? Oh, and hypothetically, like... I know a president can't run for > a third term in that office, but is there anything to stop a two-term pres > standing as a running-mate for VP? I do not believe there is a law against it. > > oh and another question from an 'outsider'. What is a GOP? grand old party > > For that matter, what (apart from the nickname of a state and a singer > about bananas) is a hoosier? Something unusually large, from hoozer, an english word i think, or a nickname for someone from Indiana. gss ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 19:24:01 -0800 From: Eleanore Adams Subject: Re: Polly-tics on the shore GOP is Grand Old Party, which is the nick name for the republican party. I know this was historical, so one of the history majors can give you the date the name grew fashionable and why. Hoosier is slang for an Indiana native, Why? Don't know. Just like Michiganders are not Michiganians. Don't know why. eleanore James Dignan wrote: > oh and another question from an 'outsider'. What is a GOP? > > For that matter, what (apart from the nickname of a state and a singer > about bananas) is a hoosier? > > James > > James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= > -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- > .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance > -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time > =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 22:38:47 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: what a country 3 lj lindhurst: >Is it true that the Bush people were actually paying for and running >Nader ads in some states? True indeed. - - Steve __________ Iąd sit down and meditate but my ass is on fire. - Bill Nelson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 22:38:53 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: what a country 4 dmw: >in palm beach county [Floridia] alone, buchanan shows 3407 votes, more >than enough tip the balance. This is the polling area with the poorly designed ballots, where people voted Buchanan when they meant to vote Gore. CNN now reports that 19,000 double-punched ballots were thrown out in this area. That's more than enough to swing the state to Florida. - - Steve __________ Well, Jesus ain't no astronaut And Buddah, he's no fool Cathedral bells don't ring in hell 'cos cats down there don't think that's cool. - Bill Nelson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 22:38:33 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: what a country 1 Christopher Gross: >I wonder what would have happened if the >Democrats had nominated Bill Bradley instead? Holding everything else the same, he would win. The reasons: no drag from BC getting blowjobs from that fat girl, and he would have been nicer in the "debates." BUT, I think his programs were somewhat to the left of Gore, and that would have killed him in the general election. Exit poll political self-identification in this election: liberal - 21 percent conservative - 31 percent moderate - 48 percent - ---------- How's this for a kick in the pants: In Oregon, Nader will be the difference. Who's voting for Bush - all the people who make a living by exploiting natural resources. They're mad at Gore because current environmental regulations are too strict. Please correct me if I'm wrong. - - Steve _______________ We're all Jesus, Buddha, and the Wizard of Oz! - Andy Partridge ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 22:38:40 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: what a country 2 Viv Lyon: >I don't know what to say. In a country where half the voting public >considers the most feeble-brained, corrupt, ill-prepared bumblefuck I've >ever seen a viable candidate for president... Bush is not stupid, he just doesn't give a shit about anything other than the comfort of his own social class. The Bush family seems to consider governing the country to be part of their birthright. (This is why The Quail despises him, yes?) Perhaps he is corrupt - the corruption of certain leisure class offspring, sliding along on their well-greased paths and thinking they've achieved via their own merit. I've yet to see Bush do or say anything that indicates he's ever had even a moment of introspection. He's certainly ill-prepared, but the Republican Party has demonstrated that they're perfectly happy with a figurehead as president. >...I don't have much hope that the Greens will end up being perceived as >anything more than a bunch of shiftless losers. Not losers, but naive. Experience tends to correct this condition. ;) - - Steve __________ Iąd sit down and meditate but my ass is on fire. - Bill Nelson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 22:50:58 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: Polly-tics on the shore GSS: >I think everyone hates Cheney. I hate his wife more. - - Steve _______________ We're all Jesus, Buddha, and the Wizard of Oz! - Andy Partridge ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 21:38:27 EST From: "Dee Adams" Subject: Re: hello from the old country (third party call) http://www.mamster.net/lftab/2steps/throwing_the_election-tab.txt _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 23:40:56 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: what a country 4 >That's more than enough to swing the state to Florida. Uh, it's a little known fact that Florida is Gore's secret name. - - Steve __________ Iąd sit down and meditate but my ass is on fire. - Bill Nelson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 01:24:53 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence Marks Subject: Re: what a country 4 On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, steve wrote: > dmw: > >in palm beach county [Floridia] alone, buchanan shows 3407 votes, more > >than enough tip the balance. > > This is the polling area with the poorly designed ballots, where people > voted Buchanan when they meant to vote Gore. How? Terrence Marks Unlike Minerva (a comic strip) http://www.unlikeminerva.com HCF (another comic strip) http://www.mpog.com/hcf normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 22:31:22 -0800 From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: for my part... It's kind of depressing to see the venom carrying over after election day. Like Hal, I ended up basing my vote for Nader partly on the prediction that Gore would take California easily. I had more than a little doubt about whether to trust the polls on this, but I gambled that they would be right. Fortunately for my conscience, they were. When the results started coming in, you bet I was on the edge of my seat hoping for a Gore victory. My feeling in the end was that both sides of the Gore/Nader "debate" had sense: Nader's platform was better, the differences between Gore and Bush were fewer than the similarities...but it would be better for the Good Guys (no offense, Terrence) if Gore won. If nothing else, I think there's a psychological advantage to a Gore victory; at least he _pretends_ to be on the side of the Light and that can have a morale-boosting effect. I also had not considered or attempted to predict the results in Congress, and I think that even if you feel Gore vs. Bush alone is too close to call, Bush + a Republican Congress vs. Gore + a Republican Congress is not. Even if the two parties are now identical, they still appear to be _opposed_, and one may work to cancel out the worst tendencies of the other. Two branches of government controlled by the same party spells trouble. For this reason alone I would definitely have voted for Gore had I felt there was a risk of Bush taking California. Though perhaps someone better informed will now tell me that this line of thinking is fallacious. I had other doubts about my Nader vote and the possible benefits of the Green party taking 5%, but there's no point in making a big deal of them here. However, I did not and do not feel that his role in this contest was that of evil saboteur. We're talking about 3% of the popular vote, right? Don't you think we have bigger problems than Nader if Gore can't carry more than 48%? And why is there so little discussion of the fact that Florida is the contested state? Doesn't it send chills down your spine when you hear someone thank Jeb Bush for "delivering" Florida? How does a governor "deliver" a state's voters? What of these rumors that Democratic absentee ballots were confiscated? Isn't the real story here the apparent attempts to fix the election in Florida? Or has everyone dismissed these as paranoid conspiracy theories? Drew - -- Andrew D. Simchik, drew at stormgreen.com http://www.stormgreen.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 23:15:48 -0800 (PST) From: Eclipse Subject: Re: what a country 4 > > >in palm beach county [Floridia] alone, buchanan shows 3407 votes, more > > >than enough tip the balance. > > > > This is the polling area with the poorly designed ballots, where people > > voted Buchanan when they meant to vote Gore. > > How? cnn.com breaking news says that 19,000 votes in Palm Beach county were disqualified because of a faulty ballot. details soon on cnn.com. apparantly, the ballot was set up such that people not paying close enough attention could have easily mis-punched their cards so as to cast their votes for Buchanan when they meant to vote for Gore. an illustration of the ballot can be found here: http://cnews.tribune.com/news/image/0,1119,oso-nation-82373,00.html and the accompanying story: http://cnews.tribune.com/news/story/0,1162,oso-nation-82371,00.html i'm also amazed at the apparant electioneering that seems to have taken place in Kansas City, where voters at polling places could pick up pamphlets describing all the measures and ballots - provided by the Christian Coalition. a 13-year election supervisor told one voter to vote for Bush because "God wants Bush to win": http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/home.pat,local/3774e683.b08,.html i was a poli sci major, - - Eclipse np: Radiohead, Kid A / Bjork - Selmasongs Eclipse | eclipse@best.com "...i feel that much of the world's sorrow comes from people who are _this_, yet allow themselves to be treated as _that_." - Maude ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 01:17:46 -0600 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: what a country 4 > > This is the polling area with the poorly designed ballots, where people > > voted Buchanan when they meant to vote Gore. > > How? > > Terrence Marks Terrence, are you disputing the suggestion that the ballots in Palm Beach County created confusion? I wouldn't give much credence to a claim that those ballots were deliberately confusing, but an awful lot of people are saying they punched what they thought was Gore's box, only to realize later it was Buchanan's. Those complaints began to emerge early in the day Tuesday, long before anyone knew how tight the race would be. Take a look at the ballot yourself, listen to some of the testimonials. It seems pretty clear that a significant number of people believe they didn't vote the way they intended to. I'm pretty sure I'd find it just as troubling if people voted for Nader when they thought they were voting for Bush, regardless of how that fit my agenda. I'm cynical enough that it wouldn't take much to convince me that this was some sort of ruse on the part of the Dems, but it sure doesn't look that way now. You got anything? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 01:54:01 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: what a country 4 >>This is the polling area with the poorly designed ballots, >>where people voted Buchanan when they meant to vote Gore. Terrence Marks: >How? http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/palmbeach/pbcballot.jpg The punch holes are in a column in the middle of the ballot. Candidates are listed to the left and right of the holes. Gore is listed second under Bush on the left and Buchanan is listed first on the right. The second punch hole is for Buchanan, but could easily be mistaken as for Gore. There are pointers to the correct hole, but they are not big enough. - - Steve __________ Well, Jesus ain't no astronaut And Buddah, he's no fool Cathedral bells don't ring in hell 'cos cats down there don't think that's cool. - Bill Nelson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 03:35:41 -0500 (EST) From: Terrence Marks Subject: RE: what a country 4 On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Brian Huddell wrote: > > > This is the polling area with the poorly designed ballots, where people > > > voted Buchanan when they meant to vote Gore. > > > > How? > Terrence, are you disputing the suggestion that the ballots in Palm Beach > County created confusion? No. I had never seen any ballots of that design before. None of the ballots I've used have been the slightest bit unclear about which options you were choosing. I will be very amused if Buchanan winds up costing Gore the election. Terrence Marks Unlike Minerva (a comic strip) http://www.unlikeminerva.com HCF (another comic strip) http://www.mpog.com/hcf normal@grove.ufl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 02:39:29 -0700 From: Eb Subject: really informative, quick-loading site about Florida discrepancies http://www.bushwatch.com This story just gets more and more knotty...we may have to extend Clinton's term, while the election results are being ironed out! ;) Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 10:33:46 EST From: "brian nupp" Subject: fatman's son I just got the Soft Boys 7 inch (I wanna be an) Anglepoise Lamp from an impulse E-Bay buy (sometimes I can't help myself). Some interesting facts: 1. Radar Records was a part of Warner Bros., so Robyn's been on that lable twice. Once as a Soft Boy, and also as a solo artist as we all know. 2. I had no idea but Andy Metcalfe arranged both Anglepoise Lamp and Fatman's Son. I'm assuming arranged means he came up with those complex tricky harmonies (especially on Fatman's Son). I dunno why I bought this. They sound much better on the 76-81 cd. But I guess I thought it would just be cool to have Robyn's 2nd official release. Maybe I'll frame it and hang it up somewhere, cause I'll probably never listen to it again... A great set of songs indeed! Brian Nupp _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 10:33:54 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Nader: Response to Jim and Michael Never before on this list have I been so personally insulted or had my intelligence questioned so vigorously. This is fun -- now I know know what Eb feels like! Jim says, >For me, Quail comments notwithstanding (hey! evolve! new genes!) it's >s-s-s-simple. Evolve, surely, exactly, as I said -- evolution is s-s-s-slow. Just because you *want* some political animal to have evolved wings, doesn't mean you can push it off a cliff to see if those wings might have evolved in all invisible-like. >So only a ignorant, blustering, moron would slag someone off for voting >Nader. You might disagree, but to assume you have the future on your >side - in such a circumstance - would be just plain dumb. Right or >wrong, you'll never be more than plain, plain dumb. Then I am dumb, plain dumb, and ignorant blustering moron, and I will gladly join a hell of a lot of other morons who feel the same way, and I would surely hope I would have the courtesy not to personally insult someone of an another country for their actions in their own political system. But then you Aussies -- all evolved from aborigine-killing prisoners, right? Isn't that how it goes? So please, lay off the tone of national superiority. Michael Wolfe says: >Are you going to just sit back and piss and moan because now you >don't have any excuse for complacency? What I do is my own business, but your whole attitude just points out with increasingly more personal frustration that you Naderites just don't get what I am saying. Most of you are total idealists, and that may be fine in principle, but this time I think Nader went too far. I agree 100% with Chris Gross. Nader's campaign could do no real good; except in the warped framework that he preaches, being there are no significant differences between the Dems and Republicans. And here's the thing -- you Naderites who believe that have got to understand that the overwhelming majority of the country disagrees with you. And faced with that, you go to great lengths to explain it away, investing your frustration in left-wing shibboleths such as the great sleeping majority, media mind-control, and corporate domination of daily life. While there is certainly some truth in these last two, I feel the greater truth is that the American public is content, and your favorite issues are not as important to them as you feel they should be. And also in the great liberal tradition, when reality does not measure up to your expectations, you then retreat into a feeling of moral superiority, like a nanny school-teacher who is convinced she knows how people really should behave. And in this smug feeling of being One of the Annointed Elect, you can come off sounding as bad as the religious right. Though I find this attitude of moral superiority personally insulting, and I am weary of all these accusations that I am some morally compromised complacent slug sucking on the corporate teat, I am only going to get *angry* at this view when it ruins things for "the rest of us." Again, I think Naderites who would have voted for a Democrat had Nader not been running are spoiled children, the cranky 1-3% who fucked it up for the more realistic and still left-leaning 47-50%. And now, faced with a Republican Regime, Naderites are becoming even more infuriating with their denial, their accusations, their smug self-centeredness. To me, it seems obvious that most Naderites DO NOT CARE about the rest of the country, they only seem to care about THEMSELVES, so much to the point that they are willing to alienate everyone but Greens. In fact, what I get from most of the Naderite postings (except maybe for Vivien's) is that most of you guys really dislike the country, in fact, it seems that you think most people -- me included -- are morons. So who cares about alienating the left, which should be your main breeding and recruiting ground? At least Ralph Nader can feel pretty good, as most of his white, male, heterosexual, affluent supporters. Screw the rest of the Left! Like a PETA protester who throws paint on a fur coat being worn by a rich woman -- you really think that's an effective way to gain allies? Nader was not a messiah, though he did do a good job of crucifying the left. (And again, Gore fucked some things up, too. I know that.) >If so, you got exactly the president you deserved, whoever ends >up taking Florida. I for one reject your notion that I deserve Bush. You can foist senseless statements like this on me all you want, it's just the intellectual equivalent of sticking your tongue out and going "Nyaah nyaah nyaah." Of course I deserve someone better than Gore, Bush, and Nader -- but I wasn't going to get it, was I? Because the rest of the country is not there to personally conform to my expectations. So I do the best I can working with a system that I can change in increments. Some of you call it selling out, that's fine. I don't like it, but then again, I don't like a lot of things that I cannot overthrow, including Death and Taxes. >If there's something to be learned from Ralph's candidacy, it's >that the entirety of US politics can be diverted by one person, >without the backing of a major political party, without the >backing of any major corporations. That's certainly true -- but I never said it wasn't. Though of course, this one person was a public figure with millions of dollars and a pre-existing political party. I mean, it's not like Nader was exactly you or me. I only wish that your "one person" would have been more responsible to the Left, and worked within the system as an agitator. I feel, as does Chris, that he only served to fraction the Left, and weaken it -- at least the Republicans know how to hang together. But then again, they felt the keen edge of 8 years out of the Presidency. >One person, Quail. What are >you going to do to make a difference? Please, that moral tone makes me ill. I am no Ralph Nader and I never will be. But I was a teacher for many years, and I was an enlightened and liberal teacher, and I feel that I reached hundreds of young people and turned them onto a more tolerant, compassionate and intellectually curious way of life. I have been in my life a Boy Scout constructing various public service projects, a Lifeguard, and I have once saved someone's life using first aid and a car to the hospital. Even now I try my best to get more people interested in literature, which I think is a sublime form of art, and one that personally enriches lives. In my past I have actively campaigned for candidates I have believed in, I always vote, and I don't shy away from debate, even with rabid right wingers. I have participated in numerous left-wing rallies, "take back the night" marches (back when men were welcome), and gay rights events. I have served as a student counselor for drugs and alcohol problems, and I recently helped a little old lady across the street. So I kindly invite you, Mr. Wolfe, to step down off your moral high horse, because I know you better and it does not suit you. - --Quail ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #319 *******************************