The thing about Howard Dean is that pre-9/11 this guy was exactly what I was looking for in a candidate. I voted for Nader as a protest vote against Gore for running such a shitty campaign, and well, being such a bore. I couldn't even consider the possibility of voting for Bush, who at the time, represented the dual problem I had with the Republican party: coziness to the Christian Right and avatar of big reckless business. So the alternative was Nader. In hindsight, I regret associating with the far left who to me, is becoming irrelevant as a political force so long as it is anti-this and anti-that without having any alternative answers to the biggest issue of the day: Islamic terrorism.

These days I'm struggling. Dean doesn't do it for me because of his positions on Iraq. I think he's wrong. Clark, for now, is my candidate becasuse I like his positions on Al Queda (attacking Bush from the right and on his competency). But I have this sneaking suspicion the more I find out about Clark, the less I'm going to like. Maybe he's the anti-Dean, whereas Dean is the anti-Bush, and everything just becomes about being anti-this and anti-that, which is what I was trying to avoid in the first place. Then again, CHECK THIS, maybe Clark is cool. "Is that a pledge pin?"

The most annoying thing is that I'm surprised how much I agree with Bush's positions on many things. I think he was right about Iraq, wrong about his handling of the dissent. I think his immigration speech seemed reasonable and appropriate. I think his gay marriage position was a little shaky, but way more middle of the road than I expected.

I do think he's dropped the ball with Osama, though. I want that guy captured dead or alive to bring about some sense of justice to 9/11. Of course, the war on terror will go on, but to me OBL is very important.

I will write more on this and get some links up, but these were thoughts of the day I wanted to get down