For all we know, the action may have done the opposite and brightened Al Gore's fortune a little bit at least for some voters. One difference between Democratic and Republican administrations is that a Democratic administration responds to pressures from below, whereas a Republican one doesn't or does so less . . . or so many believe.
Commenting on a documentary about Ralph Nader, Doug said, "At a Q&A after the show, one of the filmmakers, Henriette Mantel, said that Lynne Stewart recently gave her a hard time for liking Ralph. She didn't elaborate, but I'm guessing that Stewart thinks that a Gore admin would not have indicted her" (at <http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20070129/002344.html>).
Now, that -- "a Gore admin would not have indicted her" -- may or may not have turned true, but it is true that Democrats deliver a little for at least some.
Regarding threads on anti-intellectualism, Bitch | Lab asked, "what's at stake here?" (at <http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20070212/002919.html>).
One of the things that are at stake, I think, is whether we have any chance of going beyond cycles of protests and voting for Democrats, for if that is all there is to politics here, anti-intellectualism is just the thing for it. -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>