  If only, like, _the entire_ supreme court wasn't about to up and die or selectively retire, I'd agree whole hog that the next four years are bound to be so rotten (with the only military options as a draft or a tail between the legs retreat from Iraq, the economic realities of globalism coming home to roost, and the end of oil as we know it) it's best not to have the Democratic name on them. But in truth, I consider Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board of Education, and the upcoming urlLink Holloman v. Harland great measures of humanity's progress. I can't imagine what would happen in a leftly un-weighted court. I can talk big about my planned urlLink vote for Nader because I live in a state that will overwhelm any Kerry vote into obscurity. If I lived in a battleground state, I'd be urlLink Kerry all the way . We red staters should conspire with the urlLink Nader voters of the battle ground states to swap votes so that urlLink Nader still earns his percentage of federal funding in the next election, based on the percentage of this election's vote he garners, thus carrying that third party effort a little further down the field.
urlLink Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Larry Elliott: Pity the man who wins this election : "If defining Kerry has dominated events in Boston this week, a more interesting question is whether this is an election worth winning. For those who believe any price is worth paying to get rid of Bush, the answer, of course, is a resounding yes. Yet one look at the state of the world's biggest economy suggests that this may be a good election for the Democrats to lose.
The next four years could be tough for the US - very tough indeed - and it would be fitting if Bush were left to clear up the almighty mess he has created. " _______________ And for further reading, look at this article that isn't, but should be called, " urlLink It's the Judicial Nominations, Stupid . " 
