Is Bush's support imploding?

Walter Lippmann walterlx at
Sun Jul 13 10:24:39 MDT 2003

Peter Camejo would make a much better
President of the United States. I backed
him in his previous runs for this office and
I'm ready to back him again. He'd make a
hell of a better candidate than Ralph Nader
in any event. Wouldn't it be great to see a
Camejo-McKinney ticket in the race? It'd
draw a bit less initial media attention since
their names aren't as well-known as Nader,
but they'd be much better politically!

For those who haven't heard Peter give talks
on politics, there are two available in MP3
files at these addresses, given last year:

One of these days I'll learn how to post some
of his ancient speeches from the sixties and
you'll be able to compare them. I have tapes
of talks going all the way back to the early 60s.

Some of the nice readers of Marxmail have
high-speed DSL or other connections and,
if possible, would please download these
files, zip them, and send them to me since
I can't seem to get them here on my Cuban
dialup connection. Or it takes forever and it
ties up the house phone. So, please help as
I'd like to re-listen and comment again. To
me, when I heard Peter earlier this year on
KPFK in Los Angeles, he sounded exactly
like he did in the early sixties when I first
heard him, minus a little stilted rhetoric,
but otherwise quite the same presentation.

But what becomes problematic is the age-old
question of "where to go from here?" What
happens when the election is over? What
happens if Peter decides "screw it, I'm going
back to banking?" That movement completely

"What happens when the election is over?"
I say, let's see what happens THEN. It hasn't
come to an end yet, and it looks to me like it
is only about to begin. Peter wasn't really a
banker, but an investment broker, which is
really only a licensed form of gambling in the
United States. Well, he put banking aside for
the campaign. After the last election campaign
he didn't fade away, but has remained active.

The Green Party is nothing much more than an
electoral apparatus. I don't belong to it and do
not have plans to do so, at the moment. It's not
that important.

Electoral politics will only get us so far. Even
if Peter gets elected, the only thing that will
make his election any more politically signifi-
cant than Jesse Ventura's is if that movement
*continues to move* between elections, and
continues to build itself *independently* of
election campaigns.

In my DREAMS Peter would get elected to
the California governorship! En mis suenos!

California's politics, as are US politics as a
whole, are in crisis. They are volatile and it's
one of the reasons Ventura did get elected.
He had a good line on Cuba and ending the
blockade, too, if you'll recall. Precisely given
Peter's long history as a left activist, were he
to start to get significantly broader public
support, and the consequent slanderous
attacks on the media which would follow the
support, who knows what the possibilities
would be? In my dreams! En mis suenos!!

But, of course, there's the "what else is there"
question. It's a legitimate point, and I don't
argue with it. I think we're condemned to
support the Green party until we're in a
position to form a new Party.

Though Californians are lucky that the Green
Party is on the ballot there, we look forward
to your enthusiastically helping build support
for Peter's Green Party campaigns for both
California Governor and US president should
my dreams come true! Please just don't put
all your doubts about what might happen
afterwards out at the fund-raising meetings...

More information about the Marxism mailing list