I have to admit, I like John Kerry. Oh, its not that I want him to be our next President, on the contrary, I want George W. Bush to be our next President. I want Kerry to be the Democratic nominee. Why? Because he looks just like Dukakis and Mondale. He's going to be slaughtered by middle America. He'll do more poorly than Gore in the red counties. All in all, a great choice for the Democratic nominee, if you ask me.
To see how the press messed this up and had not clue, see this NY Post editorial.
Its not often that I agree with Paul Krugman of the New York Times. In fact, I may have never agreed with him before, but today's the day. Krugman has written an Op-Ed piece that discusses electronic voting. He starts off painting a picture:
[I]magine this: in November the candidate trailing in the polls wins an upset victory — but all of the districts where he does much better than expected use touch-screen voting machines. Meanwhile, leaked internal e-mail from the companies that make these machines suggests widespread error, and possibly fraud. What would this do to the nation? Unfortunately, this story is completely plausible. (In fact, you can tell a similar story about some of the results in the 2002 midterm elections, especially in Georgia.) Fortune magazine rightly declared paperless voting the worst technology of 2003, but it's not just a bad technology — it's a threat to the republic.
If you spend a little time on the Internet studying the controversy surrounding electronic voting, you'll see what's got Krugman and a lot of people I respect more than Krugman worried. These machines aren't infallible and as currently designed, provide little assurance to people that their vote was properly recorded.
The answer is making sure that eVoting machines produce what is called a "voter verified paper trail." This allows for auditing of the election after the fact. I don't know how anyone could be opposed to such a common sense idea.
This story from Yahoo! indicates that Clinton was convinced that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction right up until the Iraq war.
Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso said "When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime."
This clearly blows the theories of the "Bush lied" crowd and shows that the intelligence led different people, with different political views to the same conclusion.