The General has no...

Anyway, I finally finished reading the transcripts from today's debate. (The good one, not the one with the typos.)

And Wesley Clark didn't really say... anything. At all. I especially like how he answered the question "As president, what is the thing you would do that would be least popular and most right?"

So he says he's going to create a "new patriotism." I admit that I think that's a pretty stupid thing to base your campaign on, but unpopular? I don't think so.

Maybe he didn't understand the question. I guess we should be used to that.

I don't mean to sound like I'm bashing Clark all the time, but I feel like somebody has to do it. Nobody else is. So here's this reminder: Wesley Clark represents the interests of the Clintons. He is funded by Friends of Bill, and he is scripted by Bill's speechwriters.

And so far, the speechwriters aren't doing much of a job.

If Clark were running on his own, I'd have more respect for his campaign; he's not, though. He's running for the status-quo of the Democratic Party. And if there's anything I hate as much as status-quo Republicans, it's status-quo Democrats.

It's time for a change. It's time to move forward.

I don't see why not

"Should the healthy pay for iraq and afghanistan?"

More Skepticism about Clark

I can't say I'm surprised. Clark himself is OK, but I can't help but be skeptical of his organization, especially since they killed the goose that laid the golden egg.

Apparently either Clark or people in his organization think there's a lot of crossover between the Dean campaign and their group.

Yeah, I can really see that.

before - after