He ran a poor campaign the last two weeks while he was being steam-rolled by Gephardt and Kerry and the media. (Kerry was doing more stealth drive-bys.) This is similar to what happened to McCain, he faced a barrage of criticism and when he publicly struck back he was painted as hot-headed.
I like Dean and it is too soon to write him off but I am giving Edwards a lot of second looks. Not that he has great positions on the issues, they are OK, or is a substantial candidate but he is a candidate made for TV which is how the majority of voters get there info.
Dean moved the Democratic candidates in his direction, gave them a backbone, but fundamentally voters want to like a guy and think he looks like he can be President. Dean is great at times one-on-one, Q&A's and rallies but has never done well on TV.
#1 on Google for Liberal News
The head of NASA's budget in the House is a GOP conservative who was positively gleeful about getting rid of all of NASA's science programs that supported global warming and Earth being older than 6,000 years in trade for a real manned program to claim Moon and Mars.
Cancel the shuttle, finish the ISS because we have to and then close it down, cancel all programs that don't support Man to Mars with a stopover on the Moon, closer NASA ties with the military, lots of mechanical contracts to political contributors, put off all the big budget decisions for five years, this has GOP-Bush politics all over it.
#1 on Google for Liberal News
I don't have the book with me. It is very brief where he mentions something that was said about him being there that he didn't understand.
I always thought that extreme libertarians would someday see that advocating no government leads to rule by many little governments - armed mobs like in Lebanon.
I am one of those economic leftists and social libertarians who is a huge heinlein fan.
My review of For Us, the Living.
How do I like it?
Spider Robinson and John Clute rave reviews did not praise it enough!
It was not published in 1939 because of its style, although there are some clunky spots.
I think it could not be published in 1939 because of its advocacy of social changes that he could finally do starting with “Stranger in a Strange Land.” It could not be published because of it's picture of a future history so at variance with conventional wisdom and it's call for radical change in democracy, banking, sexual mores, religion, education, criminology, the right to privacy, and the list goes on.
The afterword is the first time I have seen in print anywhere some of the details it has of Heinlein's life.
The influence of the book is more seminal than Heinlein's novels in the 40's and 50's.
The basic story of the book takes place because someone in 2083 was conducting experiments in ESP for this Sanctuary Council. During this his mind leaves his body and he doesn't come back. The body is stored and in 2086 Perry Nelson, a man who dies in 1939 wakes up in this body. There is a further hint much later that Perry has moved over from an alternate world. This is directly related to Heinlein's last books involving time and dimension hoping in his "Worlds as Myth," his theory that universes are created by the act of imagining them.
John Clute says the world of science fiction and our world would be much different and better if this had been published in 1939. I would agree.
Easter Lemming Liberal News Digest
http://elemming2.blogspot.com
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2004 | 5 |
Total: 5 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Easter Lemming Liberal News Digest:
Show all comments by Easter Lemming Liberal News Digest.