Now that the political process actually has people making choices for President rather than the media village trying to do it for the rest of us, I will express my support for Chris Dodd. The odds of him winning are somewhere between zero and one percent, but who cares?
Dodd is the one Democratic candidate who has clearly stated his opposition to the assault on civil liberties the Bush Administration has mounted over the past six years, and he's the guy who's said that reversing the law which limited habeas corpus rights for people detained for suspicion of intent is high on his to-do list.
Having said that, I could be quite happy with any of the Democrats who are running. The strength of the field on that side is phenomenal, particularly when one looks at the Republican side and sees nothing but candidates who seemingly want to continue the proven-to-be-awful economic and security policies of the Bush Administration.
Posted by Linkmeister at January 3, 2008 08:20 AM | TrackBackHey, I'm right there with you, Linky, though I haven't stated it on my blog.
Did you know that Chris deadlocked with Edwards and Obama -- and kicked HRC's ass -- in yesterday's first-in-the-nation (unofficial) caucus?
Posted by: N in Seattle at January 3, 2008 12:21 PMThe Republican field is a remarkably appalling set of individuals, is it not?
A part-time political columnist for my newspaper recently wrote up a mock debate among the Republican candidates. Naturally he had to follow up with a similar piece about the Democrats the next week.
The Republican piece was far better because it poked amusing fun at things the current candidates actually do: Giulani's inability to say anything except 9/11 changed everything, Huckabee's religiosity, Romney's flip-flopping, Thompson's somnolence.
The Democratic piece, by contrast, was an unfunny waste of time whose one joke was that Bill Clinton kept popping into view every three paragraphs. The kicker -- the line that ends the piece, the memorable crack that is supposed to stick in readers' minds -- was a lame-o resurrection of "That depends what `is' is."
Maybe the writer has Democratic sympathies. Or maybe there is just so much more to make fun of in the Republican field.
==============
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://www.detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/
I suspect the latter, Peter. The Republicans are all easily caricaturized, the Dems not so much (except maybe Dennis Kucinich, because of the UFO sighting he claims).
Posted by: Linkmeister at January 7, 2008 09:24 PMEven if a reader thought the "`is' is" line was funny, it's so pathetically old.
Someone looking for a target for satire among the Democratic candidates could poke fun at candidates who seem to stand for nothing but change. Trouble is, now Mitt Romney is making the same claim. To his credit, Giulani took a shot at the endless invocation of change in one of the debates this week.
==============
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://www.detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/