My response to Thomas Eckhardt

[Michael Bailey]

On 3/7/08, Thomas Eckhardt <thomas.eckhardt at uni-bonn.de> wrote:
> grladams at teleport.com schrieb:

>  the moral failure of Democratic voters to demand that their candidates
>  push for accountability of the current administration.
>

let's not forget that a prominent Democrat, Wellstone, who did
oppose the war, was lost in a plane crash

and that the Democratic leader at the time, Daschle, was
subjected by unknown parties to anthrax terrorism

with such misfortunes and indignities,
the back bench of the Democratic party, while aware of
public demand, was unnerved by negative events,
and was swayed by the insistence of the pro-war party
and its scurrilous Murdoch-owned press into accepting
the paradigm of the warmongers...

Kerry, the 2004 "candidate", fraternity brother of Bush,
was about as much opposition as the Washington Senators
offer to the Harlem Globetrotters.

Kerry took over the momentum of  Dean (antiwar, somewhat grassroots)
and  Kucinich(who is truly a pacifist or a damn good faker) --

and dissipated it completely --

while the scurrilous Murdoch-owned "journalists" inflated non-issues
like those Swift-boat fucks and the word "flip-flop"

and ignored interesting shit like the test score of Bush for
the TANG: something like 25 out of a possible 100.  That means
some poor bastard who got 100 was bumped and had to go to Vietnam...

giving Kerry - if he were a real candidate - ammunition to sink
those Swift boat fucks...

not to mention the insipid support given to that Gold Star mother,
what was her name again --
yeah, lotsa fuckin Democratic solidarity there...

not to mention Cynthia Mckinney - black female confronts a
security guard, bfd, come-on-- double standard: Ted Kennedy drowns a girl
but McKinney can't abuse the help a bit when they are obviously
fucking with her?

ah well, so it goes