neurological dryer lint

the recent "youtube" debates were fascinating to me as a geek and someone with a growing interest in the political process. anyone doubting the megaton force with which the intertubes are changing the social and cultural landscape of our country needs to consider this: a user-driven video website that's barely existed for two years is side-by-side with a major news outlet in the process that will determine the next president.

something about that makes the geek in me weep for joy. it was such an inspiring and encouraging step - a less-sanitized, more honest discourse. i loved watching the candidates squirm just a bit when faced with "should there be reparations for slavery?" and "would you agree to be paid minimum wage as president?".

i'm sure the questions were filtered and edited at some point - but at least the content seemed to help separate the who spend more time actually answering questions and those who were only up there to deliver a talking-point-laden sound-blob.

dodd, biden, clinton and certainly edwards once again didn't say a whole heck of a lot. lots of fluff. more substance came from obama and kucinich. something about bill richardson is just annoying. i can't tell what it is.

and someone needs to stick a tranquilizer dart in mike gravel. it's cool to be outraged about stuff - Iraq, healthcare, education, the environment, abuses of power... but his platform seems to be "outraged about everything". maybe that'd make him a good president? maybe our president shouldn't sound 24x7 like i do while playing ninja gaiden.