> Listening to Gore and Bush talk about foreign affairs sent me right to
> the remote to tune in the baseball game. What disgustingly blatant
> imperialism.
True enough. There was one subtle difference which might amount to nothing. Bush aruged that foreign affairs should be about "us" in every circumstance. Gore, at least, mentioned humanitarian reasons. . . .
problem is, the humanitarian motive is always the handmaiden for evil motives, and some people aren't good at seeing the difference. Ahem.
I'd say Gore is the more consistent imperialist, but Bush is the more unstable one. For instance, Gore will surely involve the U.S. in Colombia, whereas Bush is more likely, if involved, to bring it to a higher level. The reason is that Gore's position is less popular and more calculated, whereas Bush's is more stirred by nationalist/nativist politics. Gore's policies are the sort that require fabricating a popular support, while Bush's are the sort that are given rise by popular outrage, orchestrated by god-knows-who.
mbs