Where is John Kerry?

Where would we be if John Kerry had won the election?

 

More than likely right about in the same place as we are now.

 

I bet he's gone to get a personality. At least he can speak for any length of time without reading it on a piece of paper or teleprompter.

 

I dont think it would really make a huge difference. The 'democrats' arent hugely different form the republicans.

 

Well, there marginally better.

 

Yeh, but not that mutch, there should be a viable alternative.

 

Perhaps he is wanking in the bathroom right now. maybe.

 

reading from a piece of paper? are you joking? this guy can talk. bush on the other hand can't.

 

let me guess.... COMMUNISM!

 

Bet he's got a 40 in his pants.

 

\

no that's bush's daughters.......

 

Kerry is probably somewhere trying to remove that hive from his head

 

We would be sitting infront of a computer screen.

 

my,my u r frisky 2night blackie. i doubt our sirrubin even understands what hideous things ur proposing to do 2 him.

 

well how about anything on the left? I mean there's no other real option but to vote bush or ekrry who are practically the same.

 

the parties try to exclude the population from participation. So they don't present issues, policies, agendas, and so on. They project imagery, and people either don't bother or they vote for the image. The Gallup Poll regularly asks, "Why are you voting?" One of the choices is, "I'm voting for the candidate's stand on issues." That was 6% for Bush, and 13% for Kerry*and most of those voters were deluded about the positions of the candidates. So what you have is essentially flipping a coin. Each candidate got approximately 30% of the electorate. Bush got 31%, Kerry got 29%.
The party managers know where the public stands on a whole list of issues. Their funders just don't support them; the interests they represent don't support them. So they project a different kind of image.

If you listen to the presidential debates, you can't figure out what they're saying, and that's on purpose. The last debate was supposed to be about domestic issues. The New York Times commented that Kerry didn't make any hint about possible government involvement in health care programs because that position has, in their words, "no political support." Well, according to the most recent polls, 80% of the population thinks that the government ought to guarantee health care for everyone, and furthermore regard it as a moral obligation. That tells you something about people's values. But there's "no political support."

Why? Because the pharmaceutical industry is opposed, the financial institutions are opposed, the insurance industry is opposed, so there's "no political support." It doesn't matter if 80% of the population regard it as a moral obligation: That doesn't count as political support. It tells you something about the elite conception. You're supposed to vote for the image they're projecting. That's not surprising really. Just ask yourself, "Who runs the elections?"

The elections are run by the same guys who sell toothpaste. They show you an image of a sports hero, or a sexy model, or a car going up a sheer cliff or something, which has nothing to do with the commodity, but it's intended to delude you into picking this one rather than another one. Same when they run elections. But they're assigned that task in order to marginalize the public, and furthermore, people are pretty well aware of it.

For many years, election campaigns here have been run by the public relations industry and each time it's with increasing sophistication. Quite naturally, the industry uses the same technique to sell candidates that it uses to sell toothpaste or lifestyle drugs. The point is to undermine markets by projecting imagery to delude and suppressing information*and similarly, to undermine democracy by the same method.

In the year 2000, there was a huge fuss afterwards about the stolen election, with the Florida chads and the Supreme Court. But ask yourself who was exorcised about it? It was all among a small group of intellectuals. They were the ones who were upset about it. There was never any public resonance for this. In the current election it's being reiterated. There's a big fuss among intellectuals about the vote in Ohio, how the voting machines didn't work, and other things. But the interesting thing is that nobody cares.- Noam Chomskey

The average us voter doesnt really know what or who he/she is voting for.

 

i tend to agree on most of what you say, gilligan, but the u.s. does NOT have the best health-care system in the world. the most expensive, yes. great doctors, yes. but the best health-care SYSTEM, no.

 

i've heard he doesn't care much 4 u either.

 

who's calling the kettle black? "best health care system in the world" my arse. come down here my dear where u pay $4 for essential medicines (as opposed to $189 for 20 tablets in ur fabulous health system, and this is what i would pay in the us 4 medicine i must take 2 times a time) or $16 to see a doctor, or nothing to go into hospital if u choose a public ward. i recommend u come here 2 be sick.

 

so u mean actually "u have the best health system if u can pay top dollar 4 it" which is a much different proposition 2 "best health system in the world" love. u know what? i'm roundly sick of ignorant minded americans like urself telling me "they're the best in the world" on one hand, and, on the other, denouncing the only genuine intellectual they have got in the country as an idiot. i'm q sure u haven't got a clue what work chomsky has done in the area of linguistics or the nature of the mind. grow up or get someone better to write ur material.