Before all of the fervor, and the pressure of the campaign to appeal to all comers, I was a regular listener to his podcast. I was consistently impressed by his diplomatic intelligence. I won’t call him a Messiah, but his ability to reconcile both sides of a political issue and come up with a solution that works for everyone is something I haven’t seen in a politician in a long time.

Like you, I don’t believe one charismatic person can fix things. In fact, I’m feeling more and more that the executive office should just be eliminated entirely. But since we have to have a President, I would like to have one, first and foremost, that will change the impressions of people around the world about our country and heal some of the huge rifts that have been created by Bush and Co. Think about it- a black man with an Islamic middle name becomes our President. How is that going to look to the Middle East, and Africa, and France for that matter? If Hillary becomes our President, it looks like more of the same, a continuing legacy of two families in the White House for 20 years.

I can’t tell if you’re serious or just “hyperboling” me. So many political discussion on blogs turn ugly that I’m very wary. I found your email link and will use it.

And I think Edwards would be the only reason I’d vote for a Republican President. How does that saying go – “A Tiger Doesn’t Change His Spots”? Edwards is a TRIAL LAWYER for Christ’s sake!

I believe your Senator stands for dynastic opportunism that definitely is not what our country needs. She excels at the same prevarication that served her husband so successfully. When he saw that the prevailing winds were blowing Republican, he reinvented himself as more Republican than the Republicans. That’s probably why the Dittoheads hated him so much. Who knows what Hillary really stands for, other than becoming President? Her track record in the Senate isn’t encouraging, since she faithfully voted for the Iraq war and most of what the Bushies sent for rubber-stamping. I wouldn’t expect her to have balls, but she shows no evidence of ovaries either.

Obama isn’t part of a dynasty, but his meager voting record in the Senate can only be called “white bread.” He also shows little evidence of balls, and has reliably delivered what the special interests ordered. That’s not what our country needs either.

Edwards is lacking in “experience.” But he at least has the courage to speak out against the corporate hegemony over American society, and to call for a single-payer health scheme. That’s something neither Hilly nor Barry seem willing to do, presumably because they don’t want to offend their precious donors. If they do address those issues, it’s because Edwards forced them to. Edwards seems the best of a rather mediocre lot, standing out only somewhat from opponents distinguished only by their unconventional race or sex. And since I really do want a Democrat in the White House, I can’t help but question whether a woman or a “hapa-haole” could win election when so many parts of this country remain deeply racist and sexist.

I’m old enough to have voted in seven primaries. With only one exception, I can’t recall ever voting *for* a candidate as opposed to voting *against* his opponents. Oddly enough, that one exception was John McCain in 2000 (I’m an independent in California, which then had a fully open primary). I thought he was the most qualified candidate at the time. Alas, since then he has mortgaged whatever soul he might have had and utterly bankrupted his credibility.

I hope I haven’t cost you another therapy session.