The new issue of Steamshovel Press, now at the printer, includes previously unknown Gemstone file material on Ralph Nader. The Gemstone File, of course, is a bit of parahistory written by Bruce Roberts, summarized in the Skeleton Key by Stephanie Caruana and the subject of at least a half-dozen books (including one by me called Inside The Gemstone File). Ms. Caruana has transcribed this newly surfaced Roberts letter. It claims that Nader settled for a small settlement in a defamation lawsuit against General Motors rather than pursuing a large judgement that could have gone a long way to correct the abuses he documented in Unsafe At Any Speed. So this pattern of sacrificing broader-picture goals for short-term money gain (like the 5% he wanted for future federal financing) is not new and the corruption of money is not limited to the Gore and Bush campaigns.

(The new Steamshovel Press is available for $7 from POB 23715, St. Louis, MO 63121. Checks payable to "Kenn Thomas.")

Otherwise, I agree that the situation in Florida only makes the abuses first noted by the Collier brothers more in-your-face than in elections past. Voting irregularities occur all of the time. In St. Louis, Republicans successfully pursued a legal effort to deprive the right to vote for many people through the early closing of polls. The Steamshovel Press web site contains my suggestion that Mel Carnahan's death might have been an assassination. I found it interesting that in making the decision to accept his office, Carnahan's widow had as inspiration the memoir of Hale Boggs' widow. Boggs was one of only two dissenting members of the Warren Commission who also died in a mysterious plane crash.

I am sure the debate surrounding the Florida count will not spill into such areas. It will be limited to anger about ballots, not the real bloody business of murder and conspiracy that has always been a part of power politics. If they don't steal an election, they kill for it. Dubya Junior in the spotlight, however, will give the conspiracy community plenty of fodder, not only against the party boy himself but against all of the improprieties of his puppet master papa.

Kenn Thomas
kennthomas@umsl.edu
www.steamshovelpress.com

The following anonymous note was sent to RTMark.com, a corporate brokerage company:

Amid the chaos of the current Fortune 500-sponsored election we should take a step back and, in the words of former Secretary of State James Baker, stop hurling. We will construct a website that would allow voters to recast their ballots in any election in our nation's history -- especially this one. With all the benefits of hindsight, voters will have the opportunity to shape history again. Like children on the playground whose kickball game was marred by controversial rulings -- we call a do-over. Do-over! Imagine being able to recast the votes that you deeply regret now that you've had to live with the consequences of your choices. Even better, imagine readjusting your great-great-grandparents' miscast votes back in Eighteen Something, when the Whigs and the Anti-Masons seemed to be the elixirs of the moment.

Notice how the entire establishment is screaming about respecting the law, respecting the electoral college, respecting the outcome, and respecting the will of the people, as the illegitimacy of our Corpocracy is revealed. As soon as elections whose institutional foundations were considered unshakable are shown to be nothing more than complex corporate sporting events -- the guardians of these institutions demand strict adherence to obscure and conflicting laws. The very existence of these safeguards attesting to the fact that the establishment is well aware of its own precariousness. That is why we call for a do-over. Why not? What's the difference? Just do it over until a clear victor emerges. But this is exactly the kind of politico-cultural mass realization that terrifies the 22,000 lobbyists who run the country.

Knowing what we now know, why shouldn't people be able to revote not only in the 2000 U.S. presidential race, but also in previous elections? The benefits of historical perspective will allow fresh ways to look at (and vote on) old choices. Yeah, okay, we realize the burning issues of, say, the 1844 elections, are seemingly tired news. But the winner (Polk) subsequently led the U.S. into war with Mexico. Doesn't every choice deserve to be revisited? Why not? It can only widen the eyes of the present day voter.