Riding home on my recumbent bike the other day, as part of my futile effort to will Spring, I realized that I could look up while cycling. I mean, straight up. It didn't do anything for my steering, but going down the bike path, underneath the budless branches, was one of the most three-dimensional experiences I've had. Now I want an animated Mondrian style abstraction of tree branches, done to give a sense of movement through space. _
respond?
08:44:28 PM, Saturday 21 February 2004

-

Thoughts on Nader (which I badly want to spell Nadir. It keeps turning into an south asian name. Nadir Khan sounds right. And, hey, look what google finds): my only political activity in this life was to send away for a petition to get him on the ballot in 1996. Too shy to collect more than 5 signatures, of course. I did this more from a desire for a reconstituting of american politics than any conventional issue questions. What I'd like to see would be a Convention movement, trying to rewrite the Constitution. That isn't what Nader is. I want the constitutional questions distangled from the rest of his baggage.

It should be remembered that voting for Nader is effectively not voting at all, as far as the outcome goes. People get confused about this, and get disproportionately (want a nice anglo-saxon word for this, can't find one. Why didn't the germans do more math?) upset. I'm not quite sure why. If people aren't bothered about the presidental election, or are effectively disenfranchised by the electoral college, there's no harm in treating the presidential portion of the ballot as a referendum on whatever interpretation of Nader you happen to hold. This might be the only way for citizens to express opinions on issues which the parties are unable or unwilling to address under the current system. If only there was a box where you could write why you were voting for him. Symbolic acts of indeterminate significance are of questionable worth. _
respond?