Quote of the Day

"I’ll support a potted plant against whichever race-baiting science-denying warmonger the Republicans finally settle on, but it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t prefer a candidate who actually stands for things I care about, like real health care reform and a speedy end to the Iraq debacle. Given that Kucinich is — sorry — unlikely to carry the day, that leaves me with Edwards. Who is also probably not going to make it to the finish line. And then, hurray!, the Democrats will once again be offering up a mushy centrist who speaks vaguely of hope and change, of bipartisanship and reconciliation. Why is it always the Democrats who have to reconcile, after these spasms of right wing extremism? Why is partisanship always such a one-way street?

Oh well. Go, team."
--Tom Tomorrow, summing up the frustration that many of us feel.

And this is the one (and, I think, only) argument that would make me consider supporting Edwards. He's a fighter. And I am damn tired of "bipartisanship" and "compromise" meaning 'give the Republicans everything they want while getting only insults in return'.

But I remain hopeful. House and Senate majorities seem likely to be expanded this November (and seriously Dems, mutiny against Harry Reid... the Senate misses its balls). And George W. Bush will be gone next year. Many of the obstacles will be removed. Many, but not all. I have that feeling Charlie Brown gets when he's convinced himself that this time, this time, Lucy will finally let him kick that football. That turned out well for him, right?