[Hoverbug]

I guess we can agree to disagree that Clintoon was "in the middle."

Al Gore, vice prez with hands on some of those levers, said that the greatest threat to mankind was the internal combustion engine. That pretty much qualifies him as a looney in my book, and he was a heartbeat away from being prez.

I'd say selling secrets to the Chinese, accepting campaign contributions from a communist government, and a host of other things, puts these people outside the "middle" and into the "extreme and looneys" that some think the 2 party system protects us from.

My guess is that some would say Dean, when compared to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and others, really isn't that bad.

"Political relativism" rears its ugly head here. If we start defining the Clinton admisitration as "middle" solely because they weren't as bad as others, and we feel all safe and comfy that the 2 party system will automatically protect us, then the battle has already been lost. We no longer define someone on principles and standards, but on relativism. Kind of like grading on a cruve rather than setting percentage standards to define excellence. If the highest score on a test is 35%, then 35% is an "A". We get corraled into voting for the lesser of two evils, and we are doomed.

Is it possible that Howard Dean is the boogeyman used to get even the dems to vote for Bush, so that Hitlary has a shot in '08 when she doesn't have to run against an incumbent popular prez?

If so, the scam is working perfectly, but it's eaiser to spot when the "other side" is using it.

Hb

[Constantine XIII]

Oh, I'll never defend the loser, not by any means--he should be spending time at Club Fed, that just goes to show how nutty the nuts really are. :p I'm only saying that our system is much more secure in a comparative sense, if not an absolute sense.