Ya know, Gigi, I admire your independence of thought, such as it is. It raises serious issues for reflection.

The math of voting for Nader, for example, is very unappealing from the perspective of herd-think, because there is this underlying mechanism of "social proof" which people often resort to when they are not into sorting out their own thoughts or inspecting data personally. And a lot of people are not -- it has become, through whatever reason, too painful to rub two thoughts together.

But from the perspective of stating clearly and honestly what you see as the preferred candidate -- the integrity of the individual voter --voting for Nader becomes compelling, just as for many thoughtful people La ROuche was the only candidate that made sense on the same basis.

I think the current election is fortunate in this respect -- I disagree with your assessment of Obama's character. I think he has many of the positive traits that Nader has and that La Rouche has, but he lacks their political flaws, to a large degree. None of this is absolute, of course. The notion that someone could come away with an opinion so different from your own may make you gnash your teeth with anger, but that's a personal problem, not part of the issue.

I don't suppose you guys have seen the top side of 40 degrees Faranheit lately?

A