Mayhap what humanity needs is a sense of proportion. Or maybe it's the very last thing we need.

The only way it even possibly works is if you look at them in terms of very large umbreallas or hemisheres that encompass our ideas. Like the right and left sides of our brain, however we need both to have a complete personality.

Governing bodies control all of the great ideas of the millions of people in the country, and these ideas as they should fall into many different categories, that ultimatly fall into our questionable democratic republic.

Elections ballots should look more like the spires from a bycycle with many parties attached at the center.

so now we have clark, who the best ammo anyone has been able to come up with against him is that he changed his mind about the war. sadly, despite his MANY decorations from within the military, some feel the need to bash him simply because of political party affiliation. someone who by all means might otherwise have had the complete support from the repubs based on that very military record, now has to deal with being scrutinzed by the same people who think that W's landing on an aircraft carrier was some uplifting moment in political history. how the republican party could ever call itself the party of the people is beyond me, since the second anyone falls out of the ranks they are treated like a leper(by the way, im still waiting on a response from any of the neocons on this board as to W's cutting of veteran benefits).

but then what you said earlier dawned on me, scott; why all this hostility towards a man who isnt even in the lead for nomination? why pick on the dark horse? because the repubs have figured out something that only a few of the dems have: that clark is the only guy who could beat bush out of all the other runners. knock clark out, and if the dems are stupid enough to nominate dean or liberman, it will be an easy battle to re-elect W. the neocons are great strategists, ill give them that.

but to what extent does it all go too far? is it worth it to trash a veteran 4 star general just to re-elect someone who really is only looking out for the upper class? oh well, im not really worried; let continue to dig for the tiny morsels that they have tried to use against him: compared to W, hes still a knight in shining armor. im comfortable in my choice of who ill be voting for, should he get the nomination.

brand recognition is fine to an extent, but when it gets to the point where reason is clouded, its gone too far. all presidents have made mistakes, and there have been some great leaders in the past century from both sides. unfortunately today that name recognition has become a form of self-imposed slavery, to which questioning decisions is considered verboten, and falling in line is required regardless of rationale.

so quite honestly, i dont subscribe to name recognition for that very reason. ill drink coke or pepsi, i can see the pros and cons of both black and white, and yes i will vote either repub or dem(or 3rd party if the situation warrants); but i make the best decision i feel is necessary and makes the most sense. i may lean on one side or the other, but ill be damned if ill every swear allegiance to either. the minute you stop questioning and thinking is the minute youve become exactly what they want you to.

Get down to midtown and you might find a whole different group. Hippie chicks and artist artsy fartsy groupies, tatooed guitar playin' free thinkers, and even a few light loafers thrown in. The candle and sandle crowd gathers for spoken poetry night, baybeh there's less emphasis on the car and more on the jeans. Your political affiliations, and what you believe in... reflect 'where you are' in a society. It's easy to see that Herbert Spencer was right on the money. The money's where it's at.

As a conservative, I was sometimes amazed at the savagery with which many conservatives hated Clinton, because I did NOT hate him. I was extremely disappointed in him, and in his deposition I think many folks came to see that... yes indeed... they called him slick Willie in Arkansas for a reason, and yes indeed he DOES lie. But right about now I'd give up a first bourne to have his economy back. Tons of folks made GOOD MONEY in the Clinton years. And conservatives can dog Clinton till the cows come home, and the reality will still be that he had a balanced budget, and not a 480 BILLION dollar deficit, like this Texas governor is carrying.

I'm also just flat out weary of this war. I'm sick of hearing about it, sick of reading about it, sick of seeing it on my TV. If anything has the potential to destroy a second Bush administration, this thing in Iraq will be his albatross. It sags on people. It's gonna be massively expensive, and I think folks are tired of it. There's no way that war can be good for a mixed economy capitalistic leaning society with a stock market. The recession dragged on long and deep; tax cuts didn't pull us out of it; millions of good people have lost their jobs. Downsizing, rightsizing, restructuring, layoffs, firings, termination blues and contents may settle some during shipment. Check with your dealer for details.

With John Edwards as a candidate, I'd then say to pick a relatively unknown very young female congresswoman as his vice president. This will get tons of soccer mommas, and that urban divorced professional mother category out there. Actually, the person I think would be the BEST vice presidential candidate is Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm.

Stop the endless panering to minorities because it is just so pathetic, and run John Edwards right down the middle on Bush. He can be beat.

I also think it would be a fine idea to run on the idea of bringing those American troops home in the first year. In fact, I'd tell people that if I am elected? Those troops are coming home, and every last one of them will be on American soil within a year after inauguration. Bring the U.N. troops IN, and get America OUT.