"Yet he's a right of centre conservative politician, these are, afte all, the only kind one is allowed to choose beteween under the two party monopoly system that exists in the United States."

One second writeon- what is wrong with that? America is a right of centre country full of right of centre people. If a left of centre party got into power it would be very undemocratic indeed. Itd be like putting a christian party in charge of afghanistan. Just because you personally dont like either party doesnt make the system undemocratic. You dont live there, do you writeon? And if you did, youd be far off on the political fringe. So why would anyone care what you think?

Just one of the odd things about Obama's supposed 'liberalism', in a British context most people would define him as a Tory on most issues, is his support for the racist death penalty in the United States. How is it possible for people to ignore this?

Any reasonably intelligent person who examines, even superficially, the backgrounds of people on deathrow and who actually gets executed, cannot come to any other conclusion that people of colour are substantially over-represented. Not only that white people who commit murder are statistically under-represented on deathrow. This is basically because the American justice system is based on how much money you have. The more money you have the more justice you can buy for yourself. Obviously this means that poor people of 'colour' suffer disproportionally under this system of 'justice'.

Yet Obama supports this corrupt system, a system that sytematically takes human and often innocent life, and he even wants it extended allowing the execution of people not guilty of murder. How 'liberal' is this in reality? How does Obama get away with such views?

Then there's his fawning attitude towards Israel and Zionism. His statements during the election were extraordinarily biased towards Israel. Basically he got down on his knees and declared his undying loyality and support for Israel. It was completely uncritical and an insult to the Palestinian people and their equally ligitimate rights.

Yet once again no probing or examination by the media at all - why? Because large sections of the corporations and families that own the United States decided to dump the Republicans this time and switch to the Democrats. It was their turn to 'rule'. The product needed rebranding and a yet another 'new start' the tablet wiped clean, Bush erazed from memory and it's a New Dawn in America once again!

This would be pathetic if it wasn't so grotesque.

Dr. Frans B. Roos, PHD - 07 November:"...He fought in the Israeli army..."

Rahm Emanuel was elected to the United States Congress from Illinois in 2002 and he is also chairman of the Democrats' Congressional Campaign Committee - and an Israeli citizen but not quite the Rambo he likes everbody to make him out as.....

Quote Wiki: "He and his brothers attended summer camp in Israel..... At some point during his high school years, while working at an Arby's restaurant, Emanuel severely cut his right middle finger. He sought medical attention only after suffering severe infection as a result of the wound, resulting in the partial amputation of the finger..... Emanuel was a civilian volunteer in the Israel Defense Forces during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases....."

The United States wasn't conceived as a 'democracy'. It was a Republic from the beginning. Democracy was regarded as something altogether too volatile and potentially destructive and dangerous to be 'played with' by the unqualified, uneducated, unsophisticated, wealth-lacking, majority of the population. People with no real understanding or stake in the nation. It was close to a paradox. Democracy, rule by the many, the people, was only really 'fit' for rule by the few, the best, the elite.

So mass democracy it was never meant to be, from the conception. Very few educated people in the eighteenth century supported universal sufferage and equal voting rights for all, certainly not the elite who shaped the Republic.

How much has really changed over the centuries? Not as much as people seem to belive in my opinion. The system was carefully constructed to preclude the evolution of a monarchy at one end, and the creation of mass, or mob rule, at the other. The twin fears of Patrician Republicans in the eighteenth century and beyond.

Whilst voting has slowly and carefully been expanded over the centuries, one shouldn't confuse this with 'Democracy' or even a 'Democratic Society'. Voting is obviously a characteristic of a democratic society, but obviously it isn't synonymous with democracy itself. A truly democratic society is about far more and profound elements than merely voting.

That only two parties should share power for so long in a country is, in itself, surprising and disturbing. It's difficult to think of an historic parallel. Two parties ruling for centuries, no mean feat. Yet they are not two parties at all. Rather they are twin parties, or two factions of one ruling elite, the party of wealth and business interests. There are, in reality, no other interests represented in the US legislature, business dominates totally.

The point was always to controll who the people were allowed to vote for, to control their choice of candidate, thereby controlling the

A friend of mine, who used to come to our garden during summer, to play crocket, had an uncle who organized professional wrestling bouts. He made a very nice living out of it. A brand new Bentley every five years, or when they changed models. Bit of a rogue, but generous to his friends.

Anyway, the point is, and what made me think of him and how his work reminded me of the American political, ritual; is that he organized everything, paid for the halls, the accomodation, the transport, the advertizing, the referee, all the wrestlers, the good, the bad and the ugly, the catering - the whole thing, the entire 'show' was in his hands and under control, managed, manipulated.

Only one wouldn't have realized any of this from the perspective of the hundreds of punters who screamed and howled for their preferred wrestler, who battled it out so heroically in the ring, crashing into the deck, bouncing off the ropes and smashing into one another like savages.

What shocked me, and then amused me, was that two of the star wrestlers on the tour; one, a swarthy, masked, dirty-demon; the other a blue-eyed boy with shoulder-length locks and a winning smile; two men who apparently fought to the death in the ring and hated each other; actually, in reality lived together as a couple and were devoted to each other outside the ring. They were lovely people and live in the same expensive retirement home in Cornwall.

Everyone was involved in an elaborate and very profitable charade, just make believe for the crowd, who mostly took the whole show far too seriously. They appeared, at least when they were inside the hall, to sincerely believe, caught up in the electric, heated, atmosphere, of the contest, that it was actually - for real.