And now for Gore?

[Patrick Bond]

Chris, aside from what I read as a thoroughly myopic sense of what 
Gore's about -- see the Nation magazine's July critique for example 
-- I don't know how you'd justify this statement below given your 
strong sentiments on behalf of int'l regulation of K.


> From:          Chris Burford <cburford at gn.apc.org>
> Subject:       And now for Gore?
> I have been impressed but also a little surprised at the forebearance of US
> contributors to discuss Clinton. Why gossip about what was obvious? I
> presume was the feeling. Plus a sense that while you would not want to
> campaign for him, he was better than his predecessors...

No, it was always much easier to fight the global neo-liberal onslaught 
when led by Reagan/Thatcher and Bush; as Clinton turned to 
promoting Nafta, Gatt, IMF/WB recap and all the rest, any residual 
integrity in the Democratic Party evaporated and the tiny 
liberal-left contingent had to turn to the Far Right for anti-neo-lib 
alliances. Clinton, the Wall Street Journal said before his 
reelection, is the best president corporate America ever had. 
Precisely because as a Democrat he eviscerated the left flank. This 
goes for any number of issues, not just global political economy...

P.