Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/001019.php on line 91

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/001019.php on line 91
January 23, 2004

In this, Molly Ivins takes a few shots at Kerry, begrudgingly admits there's something there in Edwards, then spends a long time talking about how Dean didn't get a fair break because he's not a Washington insider and the media ganged up on him and he's still the guy for her before she turns her attention to Bush.

Not up to her usual form. I mean, clearly she tried, but just as clearly, Dean's third-place finish in Iowa still smarts and she's blaming the media for how it covered him. Not candidates in general, just him. She may be right. The "media" sure has been quick to declare Dean's candidacy a has-been based on, as near as I can tell, wishful thinking.

(Read this for one person's view on the steps campaign coverage takes.)

I don't know how to respond to this. Some of it is true, some of it is possible but unlikely, and some of it is just paranoia. (The idea, for instance, that the instant a reformer gets power in the government system, they become part of the problem, is manifestly untrue.) It's all a bit much for me and I'm not buying most it, in spite of seeing it copied in so many places today.

And then there's this discussion of terrorism, its aims and goals, and the author's frustration that so few people in this country bother to try and understand what's going on. (And yet, once again, the author goes that one step too far in insisting the al Qaeda will do whatever it takes to get Bush re-elected.)

What's up with these columnists today? Have they all eaten largely of the fruit of paranoia or what?

But this has the ring of truth. Few of us would be able to face the poverty and disease O'Neill saw without developing a desperate desire to give some of our bounty, some of our excess, to help people for whom so little could mean so much. Unfortunately for O'Neill, it sounds like he's working with a group of the few. You don't have to look overseas to find proof of that.

And this will please you small-government conservatives. Bush intends to spend less on everything next year. (Well, everything except death.)

This starts with a giggle and is interesting to read. What more could you ask for?

And now, I have to go to work.

Posted by AnneZook at 07:40 AM