Our choices in life matter, even if the difference is measured in microns. Personally, I think anyone who believes the contrary probably doesn't get out much.

Of course there are differences - but do the differences matter, or matter enough? Is it really so bad to say there has to be something better when presented with 2 miserable choices?

Obama is clearly better than Bush was, or McCain would have been. But he's still going to trash the country, just more slowly and humanely. That's something, I guess, but it's hard to get excited about, and very hard to SUPPORT.

The worst about it is, there is literally no alternative to work affirmatively in favor of. The system is simply too entrenched.

Then you go on to add, for the millionth time, your nothing of a proposal for a solution. The same old nothing solution that those who aren't following you into are supposedly 'afraid of'.

But there _IS NO SOLUTION_. He can't propose one, because one doen'st exist. That's what is so awful. Voting for Obama isn't a solution. Voting for Dems isn't a solution, since they are complicit in all of the worst things. The Dems are kinder, gentler villains, but villains nonetheless.

Third parties have failed, taking over the Dems has failed, movement building has failed. We could try again, and I respect that view, but I don't see any reason to expect success this time around.

And pointing out that a party regularly goes along with extreme idiocy is not that same as pointing out that it regularly originates said extreme idiocy, especially where a spine is needed to do so.

Of course. But that kind of spinelessness and weaselishness doesn't breed enthusiastic support. It's just so sad that this is the best we can get.

For god's sake man! Isn't it enough that we have an African American President with a muslim name in office? Forgive me, but that's about as freakin different a scenario as I ever could have imagined fifteen years ago.

I don't care about the President's skin color or name, I care about his policies. I agree that these facts imply a beneficial change in American society (less racist, fearful of "others", etc.). But it's pretty small beer if you can still have your conversations recorded, or can be picked up and held without trial.

Better isn't always good enough.

Hell yes it can be ruled out! There is no way in Hell Pres. Gore would have attacked Iraq. Yes, we would have attacked Afganistan (that's where Bin Laden was).

2 quick points

1) Clinton/Gore did attack Iraq (bombed it). They probably would not have invaded Iraq, but how do you know this?

2) I did not support the military operation in Afghanistan, so Gore would still get a black mark from me over that decision.

Whether or not voting differently from adnoto makes us all card-carrying members of the MIC doesn't seem much like a very serious question.

OK. All I'm saying is that I can understand Adnoto's frustration with the available choices, since I often feel it too.

It bothers me when otherwise intelligent people reduce this to an issue of skin color. Its beneath you.

??? When did I do that?

And I'm going to be scratching my head about that phrase for years to come.

You've completely lost me.

I'm talking about Gore only (although I doubt Pres. Clinton would have either). I guess I have a higher opinion of VP Gore than you do. The invasion of Iraq was a crazy, cockamamie thing to do & you saw the machinations they had to go through to 'sell' it. Do you really think Al Gore would have staked his Presidency on that? All when the mastermind of 9/11 is sitting in a cave in Afganistan laughing at us (and him).

As I said earlier, I think you're right, he would not have. But the probability is not zero. Even Bush probably would not have attacked Iraq without the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 completely changed the political landscape, making lots of things possible that were not possible previously, and Gore would have inherited that changed landscape. There is no way to know how he would have handled it.

Just what were we supposed to do when a man & his gang of willing psychos/dupes murders 2500 Americans & all the collateral damage, etc. & we know he's in Afganistan? ... It's a shame you wouldn't have.

We're going to disagree on this one. OBL was not a member of the Taliban at the time. He was a guest, sure, but Afghanistan did not attack us. We certainly did not exhaust all diplomatic channels prior to sending in the marines.

Besides, in general I'd rather we fight terrorism with law enforcement rather than by using the military.

We can't know it would not have happened without a doubt, but we can judge by his speech in September of 2002 where he said he was completely against doing invading Iraq that he very likely would not have done so.

Point taken. As I've said, I think it unlikely.

However, Gore was a private citizen at the time, not the Prez. As Prez, he would have faced different pressures, been in a different situation, so I don't find this conclusive.