Reply #63: I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Care to elaborate? [View All]

[AP]

I was open minded about Dean the first time I heard of him. I made a joke that perhaps he would be good (based on what was said in that thread about him).

I said that 2004 might not be the first time a Dean Edwards gave Bush hell.

Everyone thought that was funny.

I was very open to considering Dean, as I have been with every candidate.

Just because I think one's better than the rest (which I try to support with argument, and not with spin, or lies, like "Edwards is the DLC candidate," or "Edwards said that Bush tax cuts are the engine of the economy" -- both total lies) doesn't mean haven't been fair to the others.

I think the canidates are all a bunch of fine people, and I'll say that, for example, Clark seems to be a VERY fine human being. I just don't think he, or any of the others are as good of a candidate, or will be as good of a president than Edwards.

The point I'm making here is about credibility of the critics -- me in particulare. I've been more than fair to each candidate, and I've tried to hold them all accountable for their words actions and personas. I think I've been very fair.