>Why not take it, at least in part, as a reflex against
>untrammeled markets and their social implications? When
>Marx says criticize religion, doesn't he mean separate
>the wheat from the chaff?
I guess you could say that Nader and Buchanan are criticizing untrammeled markets. Bush has actually been doing a bit of that too, with his "Prosperity With A Purpose" line. (From his acceptance speech: "The rising generations of this country have our own appointment with greatness. It does not rise or fall with the stock market. It cannot be bought with our wealth.") So that leaves Gore as the only defender of untrammeled markets, I guess. So there really is a difference between the parties!
Lieberman's embrace of private Social Security accounts hardly qualifies as a critique of untrammeled markets, right?