Bart - I thought I'd take the opportunity on the New Year to start a conversation about the Democrat
that we will support for President in 2004. In the coming days and weeks all of the usual suspects will
weigh in about their decision to run. I think that we should decide on someone early and encourage
our 'dozens' of friends and supporters to join that campaign. These are my thoughts and I (and our
dozens of readers) would like to know yours.
First of all I think it's a mistake to support
anyone from the DLC part of the Democratic Party.
Only a giant communicator like our last elected President can bridge the gap between the corporate
interests of the DLC and the best interests of the American People. In addition, as your steadfast
editorial position has proven, the 'pink tutu' strategy has been a total disaster.
People vote on contrasts. We don't want any idiots
who will campaign on the "I supported Bush 80%
of the time, but really stood my ground that other 20%" platform. The policies, practices and polemics
of Bush should be rejected 95% (if not more) of the time.
Therefore I suggest that we reject out of hand
the candidacies of:
Edwards, Lieberman, Daschle and Gephardt. These men are capitulating cowards.
I don't know enough about Edwards to throw him out.
What I know about the other three makes me want to hurl.
I originally had though of supporting the candidacy
of John Kerry from Massachusetts,
but after he voted for the war with Iraq, I have firmly changed my mind. The last thing
we need is another multi-millionaire whore running the country.
I'd like to know more about Kerry, too.
(BTW - here is a link to the Senate vote on the war with Iraq )
Who else is there?
Senator Graham from Florida (strategically vital) and Governor Dean of Vermont.
It's important to note that no sitting Senator
has been elected Prez since JFK. And before that?
Warren G. Harding in 1921. Harding and JFK were the only two sitting Senators elected
President in the 20th century (if my quick research is accurate.)
Yeah, but nobody as stupid as Bush ever won, either.
That historical stuff may not mean a lot.
Graham is a decent sort who voted against war.
He was also Governor of FL.
(But, and I know this is discriminatory, the Senior Senator from Florida will be 68 in 2004.)
More and more I am starting to focus on Governor
Dean who I would describe as a progressive moderate.
Another relatively unknown Democratic Governor from a relatively small state? It's certainly happened
before and when you look at the complete dearth of quality for "Democrats who have a chance,"
well Dean has a good a shot as any.
These are my thoughts. What are yours?
Mike, you could be onto something, but I've never even seen a picture
(please don't send pictures of Dean :) much less heard him speak.
But whoever wants to be president needs to start fighting about a year
They don't need to wait until 2004 to have an opinion about this never-elected Moron.
back to bartcop.com