>Season Ticket Holders

LOL! That's good. That's very good.

>why he would be so
>vehement about claiming
>that it would be out of
>bounds for him to regard
>Kerry as his "audience."

Why would you think that Kerry (or any other mainstream politician) would EVER listen to Noam Chomsky?

I mean, he's so far outside of the accepted political spectrum (in the US) that it's funny (in a sick, Pythonesque kind of way).

He's one of leading intellectuals on the planet -- has been for decades -- but he's totally ignored in US elite circles.

Of course, that's not so surprising, given that he's one the most profound critics of US power politics.

So why would he think for a moment that the bought-and-paid-for, corporate-puppet, candidate Kerry would suddenly sit up and listen?

>berating Nader...[but not] Kerry

I guess that folks (like Chomsky) actually think that Ralph might listen to (and maybe even act upon) a well-reasoned argument in favor of xxx. They believe that Kerry is merely a slightly milder version of Corporate Dominance, while Ralph Nader is a person of integrity, and who is on "our" side.

>it's a sad and
>disturbing phenomenon

It's sad that in the US we basically only have two branches of one political party. But let's not blame Chomsky for not pretending that it's not true.

>even if you don't think
>Nader is anything close
>to a serious candidate.

Oh, he's serious, alright. And brilliant. I just don't think that he has a chance of winning a national election in the US... not even if we had IRV! There's just still way way way too much indoctination among most US voters. (BTW, I know that's not what you meant by "serious.")

>beware the argument
>consisting solely of
>"he can't win."

You're absolutely right. It's defeatist and short-sighted. Thank you for pointing that out.