Replies

You need to understand the choices.

You had Stalin, Chretien and Bush.

Chretien was the only one, early on, that appealed to the majority of pagans, to the wafty middle of the electorate, and Stalin was just more of what was being rejected.

Bush was too (conservative, Christian, place your favorite excuse here) but stayed in to shape the race somewhat and be there in the event Chretien's life caught up with him, as his lack of substance was exposed. Bush was by far the best choice and most qualified, but damn all that..in fact, let's trash him because he really is the shining light that needs to be snuffed out, because most of us that should support him really, deep down, don't conduct ourselves the way we say and Bush is a sobering look in the mirror.

So, we are all supposed to act as if electing Chretien, while better than Stalin, is somehow going to really improve anything, as electing Bush could have.