While I hate to give even the appearance of defending anything Republican, I want to point out that it was the Democrats who kicked open the big soft-money spigot in the '90s.

Having said that, I am fairly discouraged with the results of this election. If there was any President who deserved not to have a mid-term mandate handed to him...but then again, there is so little difference between the two major parties these days, it hardly matters. The Democrats have bent over for Bush so many times in the past year, we may as well have had a solid Republican majority in both houses.

Which brings me to that asinine post about "pragmatic politics." Nothing could be further from the truth. What's so pragmatic about voting for a party without a ticket, without any clear leadership, without even a whiff of interest in the public good? It sounds like your idea of "pragmatic" = "voting scared." Vote your conscience. Vote for the candidate who best represents you. That's supposed to be the way it works, remember?

It isn't Nader's fault that Bush and Gore spent the election in a demented square dance, discussing everything but the issues. It isn't Nader's fault that Gore has a positively abysmal record when it comes to following through on his promises. It isn't Nader's fault that Bush has spent his entire career on his knees in front of anyone with a checkbook. So how is it possibly Nader's fault that Gore isn't president right now? Grow up. Until people stop thinking like you, and showing a little faith in third-party politics, the Republicans and Democrats are going to keep on doing what they're doing right now.

Nothing.