I have no idea, Nadine. I don't recall Gore ever talking about the issue. But they certainly should have.
As for your comment about the Center supporting it, I don't think that's the problem. I actually think the Center is likely to support the ICC, Kyoto, etc. I don't think the further right will support it. And right now the politics of the country are sufficiently skewed that they get a veto. That's the problem.
No, no, John, I meant the actual Center of American politics, not the center in your circle of acquaintance. To quote the estimable Jane Galt from our own FADG thread header:
Where is the center of American politics?
It's in the smidgen of space between Al Gore and George Bush, children.
There seems to be an idea floating around in the liberal segment of the Blogosphere that Gore is "Center", Bush is "Right", and Nader is left. Honey, the "Center" is not defined by your personal political beliefs; it is defined by the center of American opinion. And like it or not, that's where both the extensively focus-grouped, consulted, and stage-managed major-party candidates were. Bush is Center-Right, Gore is Center-Left, Nader is Far-ish Left, and Buchanan is Far-Ish Right.
It will be news to our brothers on the Left that the conservatives see things the exact same way they do -- except Bush is in the center, Gore is on the left, Buchanan's on the right, and Nader is off in Central America building his guerilla army while he plots the downfall of Western civilization.
Thinking that judges of the ICC should sit in judgement over American troops is not a popular idea in the actual Center, let me assure you. That's why proponents of the idea always try to tell us that the ICC only has "complimentary" jurisdiction, hardly ever to be used on Americans, an idea unsupported by the actual wording of the Rome Ruling. |
