[Risa]

YOu know, I'd agree with your assessment about Clinton-Clinton is reported to have his eye on Koffi Anan's job, and he'd love to be king of the gobalized world--in fact, CLitnon pushed heavily for foot-loose capital, NAFTA, and the China partnership, and he publicly vilified labor for opposing NAFTA--he was a sleezy crook. George BUsh on the other hand seems not willing to concened any control to the UN--he serves solely his wealthy corporate backers--picked up the Clinton ball and expanded Clinton policies--George will go for the bilateral treaties--he and Cheney have their hopes for a western-hemisphere wide energy business--

What I detest about George Bush is that he uses 'surrogates' to carry out the policies he knows the people will protest, so he can manintain his electoral standing--and he keeps silent, so everyone will be confused and thinking up conspiracy theories. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine the reality that is George Bush is what we would get when he ran on a Republican platform. However, Gore would have been just as bad.

[Risa]

>>George BUsh on the other hand seems not willing to >concened< any control to the UN--<<

I meant to write 'concede' control.

I could be wrong about George Bush's intentions with respect to the UN; it just seems like he's not as world-wide-oriented as Clinton was. He's western-hemisphere oriented.

ALl the peasants are uprising though. They've had enough of the IMF, the World bank and the Washington consensus form of economics. I don't blame them at all.