Is there a distinction between Green Party and Progressive Party. They seem to be on a state by state basis.

The Republican party is composed of several big blocks with a few 'right' wing requirements: anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-war in Iraq, pro-global economy, pro-blurring the distinction between religion and government. Somewhate multi-cultural with an expanding hispanic component, and long a bastion of cuban and anti-communist immigrants. Although they claim fiscal conservatism, the republican controlled government has been unable to rein in expenditures.

Yeah, I know there's a war on, but we're also putting gigabucks into a missile defense system which is not going to do the country any good. (It can't defend against cruise missiles).

The Dems are a much more fracture prone amalgam of moderately pro war, moderately anti-war, and vehemently anti-war, pro-global economy, anti-global economy, pro-big business, mostly pro gay writes, mostly pro-choice. Inherently multi-cultural.

In order to hold his base, Bush MUST assert more to the right than he perhaps himself is. In order to hold his base, Kerry MUST avoid asserting almost anything too strongly.

Thomas Friedman had a great commentary on the true components of the major parties and how each party contained several non-consistent elements through history and political marriages of convenience. I thought it was dead on, but I haven't found a copy of it. It was almost five years ago, but it still holds true.

As for where other parties fit in, there's more to say than I can possibly know. I developed a contempt for the Libertarians because they once nominated for Alaskan governor someone who'd moved out of state. If their own people weren't up on what was going on how could I take them seriously. I have friends who are Green, and I feel for the environmental side of their arguements, but to me they don't have a 'big picture' mentality whereas the Republicans do (a badly flawed one) and the Democrats consistently fake one (but their fake is better than the Republican fantasy).

As to global economy, I go back to Thomas Friedman "The Lexus and The Olive Tree". The global economy is a reality. It has its evils, but its 'what's for dinner'. You will not succeed fighting it, nor should you. You have to fix it from the inside. My analogy would be the industrial age. The Luddites tried to break the machines, all they succeeded in doing was getting more machines built. The unions fought the good fight and brought about a lot more good. Something similar is going to happen here. All that 'cheap' overseas labor will not remain cheap, and eventually justice will prevail.

As to world ecology, it's probably going to get worse before it gets better. More was done against pollution in free societies where powerful lobbying groups were brought to bear against big business. In totalitarian (Communist) countries, it is hard to describe in words the extent of ecological abuse, to this day.

I hope I don't come off as a hole-poker. I can still understand the resentment of third party folk towards both parties and the system we are mired in. I'll tune in here and look at more comments. We can all use some good ideas.