[Marxism] Nader to Bypass DillyDallying Greens?

Tony Abdo gojack10 at hotmail.com
Mon Feb 16 13:58:40 MST 2004

Mark, you start off your explanation of your position with a rather bizarre 
and totally inaccurate accusation of what I supposedly have said before 
about the Greens.     I do not, nor  have  said previously, that the Green 
Party are a kind of "Nader cultists".    However, I did say, and do think, 
that in the eyes of the overwhelming majority of the American public, that 
the Green Party and Nader are now certainly tied together almost totally.    
Most people know absolutely nothing about the Green Party, other than that 
it ran Ralph Nader for president in the year 2000.    That's it.

This was a profitable relationship between Nader and the Green Party  for 
both, until they began to have a disagreement in how to deal with the 
criticsms that the Nader campaign in 2000 gave the election to Bush.    The 
top leadership of the Green Party bent to this criticism, and once again 
continued with its policy of running a campaingn, while not running one.    
They decided to delay making a decision on their candidate until after the 
Democratic Primaries would more or less make it clear who the DP cnadidate 
would be.    This would allow the top Green Party leadership the opportunity 
to forge either an inconsequential token effort, or one that verbally 
engaged in more "independence" of the DP if some guy like Lieberman was to 
get the nod.    Nader disagred with this strategy.    And good for him.

<Tony,  you have blanketed the Greens in your own mind as kind of Nader
cultists.  Indeed, you justify this by saying, in part, that "the
public" (ie., you) identify the Green Party with Nader.   Once you
convince yourself of this, you think you understand the Greens and all
evidence to the contrary "did not compute".>

And now to your gratuitous flame....   Is a "hand-puppet view of things" 
like masturbation or something?      As compared to your virile outlook?     
What garbage!    It's a shame that you have to cloud all discussion with 
this sort of posturing, is it not?

<As a case in point, I have repeatedly argued that understanding the
Greens required more than your Nader-esque shorthand, but you now
challenge me to state an opinion.  Clearly, assuming that you are honest
in saying this, you've just not processing information contrary to your
hand-puppet view of things. That's sad.>

And now to your actual reason for the dilly-dallying of the Green Party in 
picking its candidate as put forward by you, Mark.    You deny that it has 
anythng to do with anything other than trying to be cost efficient and save 
a buck or two!     What comedy!    The falling out of Nader from the Green 
Party, in your eyes, was al about the leadership being more frugal than 
Nader, while Nader supposedly just didn't understand the need to save on 
publicity costs!      How could I not see it so clearly as you have?    I 
guess I was "thinking like any good American consumer" as you accuse me of 
doing.    I was not spendthrifty enuf!     Only you had the genius to see 
how essential it was to delay the campaign in order to be fiscally correct 
and balanced.

<In the past decades, the dominant factions of the ruling class
have made politics increasingly expensive, in part by extending the
length of the presidential campaigns.  This requires a candidate (not
the party) to finance a campaign for many months longer on their own
before they can get a party nomination.  Then, too, success usually goes
to the party who raises and spends the most, yet another special goose
to the incumbents.  Obviously, the longer presidential campaign will
generate a bigger audience and higher advertising revenues for the press
and broadcast media.  It also reduces news coverage to mere coverage of
the horse race.  ...and, of course, it gives the media ample opportunity
to make more news by microscoping the pasts of both candidates (less so
for the one already in power to make regulator decisions over the media,
of course).

Talking in February about "dilly dallying" on a nomination for a
November election suits the accounts receivable people in the ad biz,
but everyone concerned about the impact of big money on the electoral
process would tend to disagree.  I'm really not surprised that you

Mark, is there anything else you care to contrubute to analyzing the 
evolution of the campaiging?    Or is this it?     Just more insults, and a 
lecture about accounts receivable people and the ad biusiness?

Tony Abdo

Choose now from 4 levels of MSN Hotmail Extra Storage - no more account 
overload! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/

More information about the Marxism mailing list