Yes, this shouldn't have to be said.
If electoral work can further that,
> fine. If it can't, then
> it is empty at best, self-indulgence at worse.
Voting for a candidate isn't electoral "work," it's just pulling a lever or punching a ballot (we still have butterfly ballots here in Cook County, leaving this PhD/JD often uncertain about whom he has voted for). The question about whether we should _work on the campaigns_ of Democratic candidates was not posed. And here too, although I'd have to quit Soli, or drop to merely affiliated status, to do it -- I don't think it is unthinkable, depending on the Democrats. Signs are not great, what with the Dems tailing Bush on military intervention. As I said, there is a very serious worry that they will accept the new norms that Bush has established, and merely pursue them less vigorously and more shame-facedly. In which case they're toast anyway.
jks
If
> the Senate made a
> real difference, Thomas would not be sitting on the
> Supreme Court.
>
> Carrol
>
Oh, despite everything, the Senate makes a real
difference. Ask Nathan for details. That's why I have
always voted for Senatorial Dems.
jks
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com