Drunken Blogging...

... especially after 7 litres of beer, of course leads to the kind of errors in spelling and logical coherence that are apparent below. And I do not know if hungover blogging is much better. But I do know that what I wanted to say was as follows - before I hit globeandmail.com or nytimes.com, I start with kos and sullivan. They are the two best blogs going, and the further you get into the Sullivan archives you will realize that he finds the idea of Kerry even more repulsive than you, coop. But as fervent a supporter that Sullivan is (and continues to be) of the War on Terror in Iraq, I am at least gratified that he recognizes the mistakes made by the Bush administration and uses that as a reason to oppose his re-election. Too many people - instapundit, for example - proclaim their distaste for much of what Bush represents, but then fall back on this stance that they are a 1-issue voter, and will vote Republican in 2004 because they do not think the Democrats would, I don't know, keep them safe or something. THAT drives me insane. As I said before, Nader could argue in 2000 that there is something unseemly in voting for the lesser of two evils. But this time, the devil you know is so bad that the swing states will swing toward the devil (fool?) they do not know. Forget the polls for now, this cycle has a magical Kerry comeback written all over it. And whoever has the guts to run against the guy in the 2008 primary (other than Larouche, of course) can count on me slumming for them in Concord or Manchester before the vote. And this time you are coming.