<HTML><HTML>In a message dated 10/31/04 11:44:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, lbo-talk-request@lbo-talk.org writes: kj wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Sorry, four years ago, people like this foreigner thought there would be little difference between a Gore and a Bush as far as we were concerned. Perhaps there would have been little difference, I don't know. But for sure, we have little interest in continuing with the devil we know. More, there are times when a hair's worth of difference might just be all the difference. Maybe I'm wrong, but this might just be one of those times. </BLOCKQUOTE> It's not that that there's only a hair's breadth of difference between Republicans and Democrats. It's that the Democrats follow where the Rebublicans have led--at a slower pace. Just as Blair accepted all of Thatcher's anti-union legislation as accomplished fact, not to be tampered with, so the Dems almost never attempt to reverse any major successful policy initiative of the rival party, which has taken all the major initiatives since the presidency of Reagan. Kerry accepts the occupation of Iraq as the new framework for American policy there. This is one reason why the election of Kerry will still be a victory for Bush's policies.</HTML>