With Kerry winning both primaries today, it begins to looks more and more like hope is lost. Meanwhile, a fascinating debate among those unaffiliated with the democratic party rages on. Assuming Kerry's trend continues, how should we vote in November? The puppet on the right, or the puppet on the left?

Common points that pretty much everyone can agree upon: Bush is evil incarnate, and Kerry is a waffling dope.

Some have gone so far as to suggest that a Kerry win in November would do even more long term damage to America than 4 more years of Bush. Therefore, they are advocating that we vote for Bush in November in hopes that the democrats might finally learn their lesson and offer us a better choice in 2008. I do not share this view, but I can see where it comes from.

I believe unequivocally that the longer Bush remains in power, the worse off the country will be. Period. With all the corruption rampant in the Bush White House -- the crass crony-ism, the war mongering, the constant use of fear to goad the populace, the theocratic tendencies, the disregard for the environment, and the ongoing corporate takeover of government power -- there is no question in my mind. Kerry, though an uninspiring buffoon, would be an improvement.

Still, I have to admit that there is a perverse side of me that wants Bush to win. Unlike the poster who goes by the handle "BushOverKerry", my reason has nothing to do with the good of America. Mine is much more perverse. I want to see Bush win another term so that he and his cohorts can be around to reap the results of their destructive ways. If Bush wins, no one will be able to mistake who is at fault when the results of his bad policies really start to wreak hell in the coming years.

With the deficit ballooning, the value of the dollar falling, and the situation in Iraq becoming ever more volatile, Bush's stumbling interview last Sunday proved beyond a doubt that he is now more out of touch than ever before. If corrective emergency action is not taken very soon, we can expect an even gloomier job market, foreign investors growing more timid, rising interest rates, followed by rapid inflation, further erosion of the middle class, and either (a) an continuance of the occupation in Iraq with more loss of solders' lives, or (b) a withdrawl of troops, leaving behind conditions ripe for a civil war. Lovely.

Regardless of who is elected president in November, 2005 is going to be a rough year. With Dean, it would be the beginning of the clean up, as the harmful effects of the Bush legacy would take some time to correct. Balancing the budget would be the first step on the economic front, and there would be outcries from both the left and the right as Dean raises taxes back to Clinton levels (mostly applying to the rich, but the middle class would see some as well, at least on their federal 1040 forms), and trims the fat on some of the social spending beloved by liberals. On the foreign front, there would be a lot of patching up to do, as Bush has done a good job of alienating most of the rest of the world. Some long overdue groveling on behalf of entire United States would be required.

On the other hand, if Bush wins a a second term, he would have even less motivation to listen to the electorate. With the election done with, why care about what the voters think at all? So it's a good bet that his anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-worker, pro-police state, pro-religion, scorched earth liberation, "what's good for the CEO's bonus package is good for America" policies would become even more extreme than ever. And we would feel it.

What would it be like with Kerry? Depends if he turns out to be as much of a doofus as his senate record seems to indicate. It's a good bet that no more serious wounds would be inflicted, because I don't see Kerry behaving like the Machiavellian Sauran of Karl Rove's empire like we have now. But would Kerry be up to the task of bandaging the existing gashes? There is much reason to doubt it.

If he can't handle it, and ends up being a flake in the wind, then odds are that Kerry will be blamed for the fallout of many of Bush's failures. Thus, the BushOverKerry poster and friends do have a valid point in saying that the democratic party could suffer a long term blow from it. If the country falls back into the hands of the evil neocons again longer period time, would that be worse than another 4 years of Bush, followed by (hopefully) some real reform?

Maybe so. But I cannot stand around and condone further abuse of my country, all on the vain hope that things will get better someday in the far off future. Even if it means letting Bush get away without being assigned responsibility for his crimes against the world.

This bit of lyric has been going through my head all day long (Evanescence, My Last Breath), thus slanting my filter on the world toward a very melodramatic tint. But I love it.