Reply #104: I agree. Primarily because they are not thoughtful.

[muse]

Obviously, deconstructing why we didn't win this election is mandatory. Thoughtful, intelligent analysis of Kerry post-election is critical to our chances in 2008. I have been intrigued with the few intelligent critiques of how Clinton's Lewinsky/personal morality "problems" may have affected Kerry's chances for winning in 2004. It's something I hadn't thought about during the campaign.

Personally, I think Clinton is and always will be one of our Democratic heroes and legends. Just a glimpse of him on TV or in a photo, and I long with all of my heart for him to be our president again. It's an instantaneous feeling.

To me, John Kerry was a terrific candidate. I saw him on C-SPAN the other day speaking on the Senate floor and I was reminded all over again why I thought so - he is smart, knows the issues backwards and forward, is on the right side of all of the issues I hold dear (health care, children's issues, reproductive rights for children. the environment, etc.) - he has and always will be a champion for these causes, he is a moral and ethical man - not a blemish or stain on him. It's a travesty that Bush was able to make the flip-flop label stick and also tarnish his Viet Nam record. He effectively made this great man look small and ineffective in the mind of many voters.