Salon has a good piece on Nader today. Apparently, his new schtick is to claim that his campaign is tailored to lure away disillusioned Bush supporters. Let's see.

Nader's campaign itinerary raises more questions about his professed drive to find GOP support. I was following Nader on his "Northeast Tour," which hit some of the most Democratic-voting cities in America. Visiting Amherst, Boston and Concord -- the liberal center of New Hampshire -- is a funny way of looking for Republican votes. "Well, in June I'm going to Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois," Nader told me. "I'm just going to every state." (Iowa and Illinois voted Democratic in 2000.

Hmmph.

And while we're on the Nader subject I just have to say something. I'm really getting tired of being stuck on the "Kerry Voted For the War" line with these people. Yes, I was upset too. More upset because before that I was all ready to support him. And the war is going badly.

But, A)the war is not Kerry's fault. It's Bush's fault. And voting for war based on evidence that turned out to be false is not the same thing as providing false evidence so that we might go to war. And, B) if you do vote for Nader--which is your right--if Bush wins by a narrow margin and the war continues and continues to go badly, it will be your fault.

So think about that this summer. Kerry actually has a stake in turning things around in Iraq. If he wins we can reasonably assume that he will listen to reason. Bush won't. He hasn't and there is no reason to expect that he's going to start anytime soon. With Kerry there is hope.

If you really opposed this war, you will vote for Kerry. But like I said it's your choice. So go ahead and vote for Nader, and if Bush wins and the bodies keep piling up, you can comfort yourself that you voted your principles.