Michael Dawson -PSU wrote:
>
> Lacny: This is exactly why Nader's behavior has crossed the line from stupid
> to treacherous.
So John is back to calling other leftists traitors if they happen not to agree with him on a tactical matter.
And just when did Nader or Cox or the CounterPunch Staff take an oath of allegiance to the shitheads who run the DP?
Is John still keeping his arrogant signature line?
Back when I was reading a good deal of material from China I got pretty tired of "lackeys and running dogs." But at least the people from whom that vocabulary came had bought the right to it with their blood. John's one claim to glory seems to be his skill in drawing moralistic lines turning as many other leftists into enemies as he can -- a traditional sign of the ultra-leftist who has lost his/her moorings.
The line is between those who support U.S. aggression abroad and those who oppose it. Just as some on this list are too good to associate with the trash from ANSWER, John is apparently too good to associate with anyone who won't bow down to the DP. He seems no longer to give a damn about what happens after November as long as that warrior Kerry gets elected.
Do you or do you not, John, wish a unified anti-war movement in January 2005? And if you do, why are you calling so many in that movement traitors?
The position of leftists on the 2004 election is NOT a matter of principle; it is a matter of contingent judgment. Anyone who tries to make it a matter of principle is acting like a provocateur.
Carrol