Session: 123456789101112131415161718         Page 32333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465 of 617

with the status quo, will not compromise, will be a constant irritant. That's really what the hairshirt is: it's a constant irritant to the one who wears it. The VID is a hairshirt to the reform movement, because we're part of it and we're constantly irritating it.

Now, I happen to believe that I have at this point or should have a hairshirt role. And while I was extremely proud of the Village Voice editorial which was issued in 1962 when I lost my race -- it was so lovely I had it on the wall of my office... It referred to the VID as a hairshirt, but I was the VID at that moment simply because I was the candidate. It said we were the hairshirt. Now I can't give you a better definition than that. It still has a somewhat hairshirt role; I do not. I see my role much differently now than I did then, and I guess that comes, one, with winning, and two, with the perception of what you can do with the power that you get when you do win. If you want to do it in a way that's helpful in a way to advance causes, you can do it, I suppose, as a hairshirt. Ralph Nader would be a hairshirt and somebody who does good work. I like the fact that in the book which is put out every two years called the Almanac of American Politics, they say something like this about me: “Very effective, able to work with other people, realizes there is a world outside of Manhattan and has been able to work with people like Barry Goldwater, Jr.” The thrust of the thing is that I'm someone who has been able to break out of the reform syndrome, which is not to work with anybody. And I hope I have