It's never too early to sell out and betray America.

One can hope that this will be as effective as their support for Nader in 2004 was.

Fight fire with fire, give generously to the Libertarian Party.

In general the dominant party is more susceptible to divisiveness, and the opposition party is more likely to have unity. In this campaign cycle the President has done a heck of a job as a uniter of the opposition, and divider amoung the non-evangelical, fiscally conservative socially libertarian right.

So with a wider variety of candidates it should be the Perot Republicans who bolt this time, while the Naderites come back into the fold.

But it does help to shine a light on the flow of money, and its intent.

Santorum's campaign is proudly, knowingly misleading the public in one of their tv ads.

This doesn't really affect the discussion at hand, but just for the record: the Greens didn't endorse Nader for president in 2004. They endorsed David Cobb, who promised to only campaign in non-swing states. When Kerry threw in the towel before there had been an adequate recount in Ohio, Cobb (along with a libertarian) did a strong job, even though the mainstream media mainly ignored it, at forcing a recount and pointing out irregularities in the counting that most Dems belittled.

This doesn't change what Dan is posting about. The Greens-- who aren't monolithic-- are being stupid in PA, and perhaps have been infiltrated. But I get the feeling most Dem bloggers, who hate radicals anyway, have no idea what they're talking about when they make blanket statements about what the Greens have and have not accomplished.

...and I hear they lick doorknobs.

Why are the Greens taking dirty GOP money? Doesn't that go against being a Green in the first place?? Is the Green Party just a front in PA? It doesn't add up.

Romanelli didn't have the potential of affecting this race one wit. But now, because of the way Casey has overreacted to it, everyone is talking about him, looking at his web site, and hearing how he can really hurt Casey.

Casey's braintrust has managed to move Romanelli from the irrelevant fringe third party candidate to a factor. Without spending a dime of his own money, Santorum created quite a distraction. All he had to do was depend on the Casey folk to be unable to resist the bait.

Anyone recall that huge lead that Casey had in 2002 . . . . ?

Romanelli didn't have the potential of affecting this race one wit. But now, because of the way Casey has overreacted to it, everyone is talking about him, looking at his web site, and hearing how he can really hurt Casey.

Oh, like the way the pundits overreacted to Howard Dean's post caucus pep talk in Iowa back in 2004? Yeah, overreaction is apparently a coercive tool to get the masses to react a certain way.