One's argument in support of Nader or Kerry stands, regardless as to what you do with your time/money.
Carrol has, for years, spoken of organzing, while also admitting that he often didn't do much in that regard given depression and other issues. Carrol's arguments over the years stand, regardless as to whether he's been active or not.
Kelley
At 10:19 PM 7/17/2004, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>>First of all, there are a lot of "if"'s in what you wrote above.
>>Secondly, one of the nice things about list servs is that, generally, you
>>are forced to debate an idea based on its merits [or lack of them],
>>without ad hominem recourse to a speaker's economic/cultural/political
>>background.
>
>If we are talking about mathematics, what we are doing politically --
>giving time or money or both or nothing -- is irrelevant, but if we are
>talking about domestic politics, that seems to me to be highly relevant
>information. Why should I care about your opinion if you do not think
>that your opinion is good enough for you to act on it?
"We're in a fucking stagmire."
--Little Carmine, 'The Sopranos'