I don't get it. I"m sooooo confused.
Yoshie looked us up on a dems contribution list...and now everyone's apologizing/acting out?
=========================
Ah yes, it might seem to all be a bit, well, out of proportion to the bare facts but there was a paragraph that, I think, sparked the reaction.
That paragraph being:
Given the frequency with which the Anybody But Bush and Nader sentiments are aired on LBO-talk, I thought that more LBO-talkers must have given money to at least one Democratic candidate -- most likely Howard Dean or John Kerry, as Dennis Kucinich seems to be even less respected than Nader here -- but that doesn't seem to be the case. Why is that?
.......
So it seemed more like a poke of the hot needle of inquiry than a simple query.
The argument's general outlines are now in sharp focus. It centers around the question of why more of the infamous ABB-ers aren't supporting Nader, choosing instead the inevitably terrible Kerry.
The response remains the same: because Bush and co. are unusually bad, even by the usual standards of badness and the mostly spine-free Dems provide a possible route back to standard awfulness (from which a base can be built) instead of mad scientist (boo!) madness.
The response to the response remains the same: Bush is just more of the same only at a slightly louder volume and besides, he's finished come November so if you're serious about building alternatives you've got to find a seat on the Nader machine - the ride is smooth and progressive.
Suddenly, without warning, there's a blinding flash as everyone travels down a wormhole, across an event horizon to the origin point of the argument. It starts anew, sometimes with slight variations such as "I visited fundrace.org and noticed you weren't there.
What's the dilly, don't you love those Dems?"
But the contours are as familiar as an old couch.
.d.