US political elite engineers a Kerry-Bush election

I guess the World Socialist Website is working for the Republicans now too. They sure do sound a lot like Ralph Nader. Or could it be that they actually represent real left wing thought?

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/mar2004/kerr-m04.shtml


The stage is now set for a presidential election contest between two representatives of the American political establishment, Kerry and George W. Bush, who have no fundamental differences. In a country of nearly 300 million people, with a complex and increasingly polarized social structure, the political choice offered in November will be to decide which Yale-educated scion of a wealthy family will govern the country.

On the most burning issue, the war in Iraq, Kerry�fs differences with Bush are purely tactical. He opposes demands for the withdrawal of American troops from the occupied country and calls for the commitment of whatever military forces and resources are required to crush the Iraqi resistance.

As one right-wing columnist gloated Tuesday in the Washington Post, Kerry�fs nomination means the war is off the table as an issue. Columnist Robert Kagan wrote: �gThe chief criticism of President Bush�fs foreign policy in this campaign is obviously not going to be that he invaded Iraq. The big antiwar candidate, Howard Dean, is finished. The two remaining candidates for the Democratic nomination both voted for the war.�h

In his major foreign policy speech last week, Kerry made it clear that he would attack Bush as much from the right as from the left, indicting him for not spending enough on homeland security, for not pursuing the war in Afghanistan aggressively enough, and for not confronting North Korea over its alleged possession of nuclear weapons.

I find this article to be the most sensible, realistic and accurate take on the upcoming "election" I have read. A perspective UTTERLY absent from all mainstream media in the US.

If John Kerry is the guy instead of Bush, who further curtails civil liberties after a "terrorist attack", will you be OK with it?

"Either you're with us or against us".

Martin

Are you saying that the WSWS article exhibits the same mentality as the Bush crowd? I'm not fully awake yet, but it sounds like that's what you're saying.

Interesting critical analysis of the Fourth International here:

http://literature.rebelyouth.ca/trot/

It basically says they are full of reactionary and anti-revolutionary polemics counter-productive to progressive activism.

I do not endorse this article except to say it provides some perspective for the cited article.

To say Kerry is the same as Bush is idiotic and sounds like the historical mouthpiece of the right wing financiers.

Honestly, I read your article and I would say it is worth little to nothing especially considering that it is 30 years old. Of course the "MLK was an Uncle Tom" is your your own inflamatory paraphrase.

What are the important differences between Bush and Kerry?

When Establishment engineers the next "terror attack" in America, and Kerry focuses entirely on the "War on Terror" as he says he will do, what will get better?

over at freerepublic, just giving it a little spin by taking away the pejorative terms -- tell them how Kerry is not fundamentally different than Bush. Then add the corollary argument about how he is more soothing and appealing in his demeanor than GWB - since the policies are the same (and perhaps Kerry is even more conservative per this argument), JK is better because he is less offensive in his manner to the majority of voters and our potential allies. Then it would be interesting to see how many votes for Kerry would be generated over there; all as a social experiment of course.

they were pulling for Dean.

The WSWS is rewriting history.

The fact that Americans can't see how completely manipulated they are is what make me nauseous. Luckily I no longer live in the States, but with the internet I can read the ever-more-Corporatist American media has to say. But at the same time my primary sources of informatin are not American, and my favorites are not in English.

What I want to know is what I've missed about John Kerry. What makes him different? What "mistakes" (as Kerry would call them) made by GWB is he going to change? Is he going to do away with the Patriot Act? Hardly. Is he going to withdraw from Iraq? Not a chance. Is he going to lower defense spending? Increase is far more likely. He says this himself. Has anyone else read the LA Times article?

www.latimes.com/.../ 2004/inside/la-na-kerry28feb28,1,4534775.story?coll=la-headlines-elect2004-inside


Kerry is a "free" trader. Just like Bush (and Clinton for that matter). Corporations will only get more powerful under his watch (at the same pace as under Bush and Clinton).

One thing Kerry won't do is give people the idea that abortion might be made illegal. Big Deal. Fact is, even under Bush it won't be made illegal. Bush wants abortions legal as much as the next guy or gal. He just publicly opposes them with words (and few at that) to appease RW nuts and give the appearance of a fundamental difference.

Will Kerry bring America into accordance with the Kyoto Protocol? Not a chance. He will be too busy with the escalated War on Terror.

Never fear folks. Kerry will win the "election". You will have a Democrat for your next President. And absolutely nothing (of any importance) will change.

But perhaps your minds will rest easier as you watch TeeVee and more innocent people around the world are killed.