> Sure. But you are only going to defeat one of them. And the fact that
> Naderites can't deal with that fact is why most Democrats have such scorn
> for them.
I'm sure that the Naderites and the Greens relish being attacked by Democrats. It's confirmation for their support of a Third Party. The Democrats are pretty fucked up if they reserve their vitriol for Ralph Nader instead of Bush and his war. Why aren't the Democrats fighting Bush more openly? Because they are essentially Republicans who support almost everything that the Republicans support. Ralph Nader and the Green are a threat because they are a visible exception to the fiction that the Democrats are an alternative to the Democrats.
But everybody on this list knows this stuff.
> Actually, no. Many third parties started as caucuses within a bourgois
> party and only split when the caucus became large enough to compete on its
> own. The Labour Party is the most obvious example-- splitting from the
> Liberals-- but there are many other examples around the world. The
> Communist Parties around Europe mostly started as factions within the
> Social
> Democratic parties. Only in almost purely proportional representation
> systems have third parties been able to start from scratch, rather than as
> factions within a larger bourgois party.
So the Greens didn't emerge from within the Democratic Party, but many of the people who now support the Greens used to be Democrats. If the Green Party grew up independently, all the more reason for it to stick to its guns and not play footsie with the Democrats.
Better watch my mixed metaphors lest I lapse into a Zippy non sequiter.
> Let's see
> * Kerry is for repealing tax cuts for the wealthy; Bush is for increasing
> them
Kerry is not opposed to the wealthy. Tax cuts are a small issue. What will Kerry do to take the class war to the rich?
> * Kerry supports expanding labor laws; Bush is for gutting them
Labor laws? How about coming out and saying that all workers should be unionized? Would Kerry support a general strike? Will Kerry come out and say that CEOs should make the same wages as line workers?
> * Kerry is for raising the minimum wage to $7 per hour; Bush opposes that
Kerry is a man of great vision. Does he understand how hard it is to live on $7/hour? The living wage out here in Kansas City is around $9/hour. Why isn't Kerry calling for a living wage of $10/hour?
> * Kerry is for Roe v. Wage; Bush is against it
That would be Roe vs. Wade. This is a red herring, because the Democrats have been using Roe v. Wade as a "lesser of two evils" argument for the last 20 years. Women currently have the ability to get abortions, despite 16 years of Republican presidents who said that they opposed abortion. In fact, the right wing chipped away at reproductive rights the most under...Bill Clinton!
> * Kerry is for ending job discirmination for gays; Bush is against new
> legislation
This is not a bread and butter issue for most people. Kerry is jumping on the societal bandwagon here. Many businesses are becoming gay-friendly without the help or coercion of the government.
> * Kerry supports expanded health care for most working families; Bush
> opposes that
Expanded health care? What the fuck happened to universal health care? You mean that Kerry won't go so far as Clinton and supporting universal health care? The Democrats talk a big game about healthcare, but millions of us are still without healthcare.
> * Kerry is for a $4000 tax credit (refundable) for every college student;
> Bush doesn't
Only $4000? You know how much college costs these days? How about a free college education for anybody who wants it, funded by an end to the military-industrial complex?
> * Kerry is for earned legalization of immigrants; Bush has no legalization
> in his immigration proposals
President Kerry, tear down this border fence!
> * Kerry supports the Clean Air Act; Bush has gutted it
Cough, cough.
> * Kerry supports DREAM Act to allow undocumented immigrant children to go
> to
> college; Bush doesn't
You are reaching here. Perhaps I should list some big issues where the Democrats and Republicans see eye to eye on, like the Patriot Act, or invading other countries, or the gulag prison system, or the gigantic Pentagon system.
> Yes, he doesn't agree with every left position, but he clearly
> differentiates himself from Bush on many issues.
>
>
>>The Bush
>>regime may be pretty crazy, but it's not much different than Clinton,
>>Bush 1, or Reagan.
>
>
> We disagree.
I know. That's why I am an anarchist.
Chuck0