Fast Track Passage

[dave dorkin]

How about a thanks to years of DLC nonsense among
other things? What you say makes very little sense. 
Nader seems to be your excuse for any result which you
dont like, Nate. Fast track failed under Clinton but,
as you know, not for lack of trying on Clinton's part.
How about taking into account the years of constant BS
from dems like Clinton on "free trade issues" that
must have helped to build the consensus on fast track
(and other issues) to begin with? This is one reason
why it can be supported by dems and not be seen for
what it is by many of those who traditionally vote for
the dems. 

 "Even on an issue where Gore and Bush agreed..." gets
thrown in at the end for good measure. The continuous
gyrations done in order to make it seem as if you were
supporting the SPD against the red army fraction are
amusing. It is time you accepted that there are
intelligent activists who simply disagree with you and
your approach and they are not by definition immature
pie in the sky intellectuals who are too "inorganic"
to connect with the world of really existing politics.


> How about a Thanks Ralph for the result.  Notably,
> againt the argument of
> those who said Clinton made it more likely for trade
> agreeements to pass,
> this vote is proof of the opposite.  Fast track
> failed under Clinton, but
> despite overwhelming Democratic opposition in the
> House, it picked up so
> many more GOP votes under Bush that it was pushed
> through to passage.
> 
> Folks will no doubt bitch about individual Dems who
> crossed lines to support
> the legislation but this vote is as irrefutable
> empirical disproof of the
> argument that we gain ANYTHING from having a GOP
> President as it comes.
> Even on an issue where Gore and Bush agreed, the
> result was worse under Bush
> than it would have been under Gore.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com