An election is coming. Universal peace is declared, and the foxes have a sincere interest in prolonging the lives of the poultry."
-George Eliot
I support a cause that is not in my best interest on one hand.......I stand to prosper as long as money making is given the highest priority. However, what will I do with all my money if so many around me are hungry and envious? And how far will my money take me if I'm the next target of terrorism, fueled by my greed? We need to be rid of GW and the neocons, the religious right fanatics along with them. We need some maturity in the White House and Congress. Now if the Democrats would just get going. What are those guys doing with all that money I'm sending?
The problem with republicans or democrats [politicians} is that neither is worth the powder to blow them to hell.
No, cav, it is demiCOG -- okay so some of my humor goes over one's head. Sorry about the SST humor.
au1929 -- they are politicians and they need no help in getting them into Hell.
Government: n. -- the art of the few to fake appeasing the wants and needs of the many.
There is on Democrat that has a real message.
Unfortunately, he has near zero chance of winning the Dem. nomination.
What is his message.
Go here and read for yourself.
http://www.house.gov/kucinich/
"Near zero" is probably an overly optimistic assessment of Kucinich's prospects. Mosley-Braun polls well ahead of him, and all she's running for is the talkshow circuit. Dennis the Short actually seems to be sincere.
I have a way of picking winners
Hell, don't feel lonely in that, Dys ... It was probably me who doomed Kerry. I really figured he'd be a factor, not a counterpoint. Lieberman prolly has cause to be irritated with me too.
Dys -- Yours in the moral winner, no matter what happens. He's "telling it like it is," though I have some admiration for Dean's reaction to criticism of his medical deferment.
Kerry, Lieberman and Gephart have had plenty of opportunity to ignite the electorate in past campaigns. The fact they drew blanks ought to tell us something about their appeal these days. For that reason alone I would put my money on Dean. My preference is Kucinich, but I'm willing to vote Dean.
Reserving comment on relativistic morality, political or otherwise, I'm inclined to observe that moral victory most often is claimed by those struggling with underwhelming practical achievement among the other categories of victory.
edgar, If my choice was Kucinich (or anybody else), but Dean had the best chance of winning, I'd do the same and vote for Dean. Learned my lesson on the last election; swore never again.
In a capitalist society, "practical achievement" is often immoral. It's just that some like to shrug that off, Timber.
Me too, c.i.............I want whoever can unseat GW. If Gore could beat him in the popular vote and lost to him by only one electoral vote and not even that had business been conducted properly.......then Dean should be able to do it, especially if we all keep our eyes on the ball.........we have to get rid of Bush. And so it looks so far like Dean's my man.
In another thread, someone posted an article showing Dean ahead in Mass., ahead of Kerry. Which is embarrassing for Kerry but which also points to the same thing which made the 2000 election so close -- about half the country is dedicated to electing people they believe to be "outsiders."
o Kerry, Gep, Lieb, Kuc etc. are doomed. Perhaps we ought to start singing the "praises" of Bush as a consummate insider: his dad was a longtime Washington flack, he's surrounded by insiders, he spent his life using Washington insiders to bail him out, and he's deep inside Washington right now. The more his faltering followers see him as corrupted by Washington, the more they'll falter.
I thought Dubya sold himself to the voters by representing himself as a Washington outsider.
I'd hafta say a couple-three years behind the Big Desk in The Oval Office pretty much relieves anyone from any sort of claim of being a "Washington Outsider", more or less by definition.
