Politics has got me all stirred up today. I’m hoping that the Iraq-Niger-uranium story will continue to gain steam, but I’m not expecting much. I do get some tiny inklings, though, that the American media is finally waking up to some of these stories. If so, that’s good news.
Meanwhile, Salon basically Photoshops the word “LOSER!” in red over Howard Dean’s face, earning my scorn. The article contained the most idiotic passage I think I’ve ever seen on Salon:
“The Democrats would be much better off in that case with a blander, more faceless, less exciting Kerry, Gephardt or even Lieberman (perhaps with Edwards, Florida Sen. Bob Graham, or retired Gen. Wesley Clark as running mate) than they would be with a fiery, controversial Dean.”
Yeah. Bland, faceless and unexciting. That’s the ticket.
I have been hesitant to join the Dem Nominee discussion, namely because I am one of those people vilified by many Dems in 2000 for voting Green.
Even writing that feels very scary – I hope the discussion on this issue is way more civil this time around than in 2000…
Anyhow, I think Dean can secure the Dem Nomination, a gut feeling, plus I am really convinced that he has the “look” to make it in.
But who knows with the DNC? The Gore/Lieberman ticket was so bland, so conservative, so UNSEXY…a winning combination! If they don’t get the message this time, I fear all is lost.
As for Niger, I hope along with you that this story stays in the fore. What is happening with sending troops to Liberia (what a perfect distraction, not a REAL war that peaceniks like me would bother to protest, but a way to get more of our service women and men into dangerous situations, thereby rousing our patriotism – does their evil know no bounds?) may just knock it out. Convenient….
Yes, because going bland worked SO well for AL GORE AND MICHAEL DUKAKIS. christ on a stick. I hate Nader, but get Nader to run on the Democratic ticket (ho! ho! maybe with Michael Moore as veep)….