CV&D position? (was Re:

[Ed Still]

(If you want to get something to all the board members, email it me 
and I will forward it.)

Let's take a look at your argument so far.

You began by accusing CV&D of "myopically focussing on the 
parliamentary form (with prop rep) as the 'only' way to get rid of the two
party system...."

I responded:
>If you mean that CV&D is supporting the parliamentary system to
>replace Congress, you are wrong.  CV&D has taken no position on
>that.

Now you have changed your attack to saying that CV&D is de facto supporting 
"the parliamentary form" because it concentrates "so heavily on prop rep for 
legislatures."  Once again, let me point out that a parliamentary form of 
government is not synonymous with proportional representation.  See for 
example, Great Britain, Canada, and (until the election this month) New 
Zealand.

Ed Still