Why, William, would this be a concern to you?  Do you really see a
significant difference between the two candidates of corporate America?
Each of them supports militaristically enforced American hegemonic
exploitation of the mass of the world's population through global
economic manipulation ala WTO, GATT, APEC, IMF, etc.  In the process,
rhetoric notwithstanding, they both support destruction of our
environment (though at different rates, if that makes a huge difference)
and the concentration of more and more wealth in fewer and fewer hands.
Their own usage notwithstanding, both are conspicuously silent about
substituting harm reduction strategies for the escalating incarceration
cycle caused by the so called war on drugs, both meddle incessantly in
the domestic affairs of other countries, both support the embargo on
Cuba and the escalating war in Columbia, the mass destruction of 5,000
Iraqi children every month, genetically modified foods, and so forth.
Meanwhile poor people numbering in the billions lack adequate food
leading to much malnutrition and starvation, lack access to clean
drinking water, lack access to even basic health care such as
vaccinations, and so forth -- all of which could be tended to for less
than the cost of a single year's expenditures on so called defense (of
the oil and other multinationals).  A plague on both their houses.

William Meecham wrote:

> Same old, same old.  Gore has as of now beaten Bush
> by over 300,000 votes and counting.  If Bush manages to
> steal the election, there will certainly be much! trouble.
> w