[lbo-talk] No, actually, I don't believe it.

snit snat snitilicious at tampabay.rr.com
Thu Nov 4 05:59:54 PST 2004


At 08:35 AM 11/4/2004, Gary? wrote:
>Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
>
>
>>Ah, that wisdom of Monday morning quarterbacking....
>>Could you offer some insights as to why Kerry was a bad candidate instead of
>>20/20 hindsight?
>
>Point me in the direction of one post that advocated Kerry as the
>candidate of choice for the left. The most positive reaction was ABB.
>Why was there an anybody but bush movement if Kerry was a legitimate
>contender.

honestly! you expect democrats to select a candidate of choice for the left? you be smokin' mighty fine weed!

You mean the left blogosophere or something--which I hardly consider "the left"? Most of them were for Dean. _He_ was a candidate for the left? I think not!

Some of the blogs are talking Obama. Obama _clearly_ had a moral message -- when someone is starving on the southside, it matters to me even if I don't know him. But what was the rest of his message at the convention: one America and a nationalism that would make most leftists heave.

I really don't get it. We're talking electoral politics. It's always going to be Anybody But The Republican if you're going to participate in procedural democracy -- at least under this electoral system.

It's only 1/2 hr of our lives every four years, because the rest of the time our job is to change the way the wind is blowing and for those so inclined to raise the sail that's going to harness that wind. Without the wind... without the sail ... none of it matters. It's no use for the people raising the sail to scream at those of us who are doing the best we can to change the way the wind is blowing.

Ahhh, fuck-a-bucket.

Kelley

"We live under the Confederacy. We're a podunk bunch of swaggering pious hicks."

--Bruce Sterling



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list