I saw my first political ad of the season. It was from "Wes" Clark and was about his ability as military leader (when did Wesley become "Wes"? Did I miss something?). The former general's ad wasn't negative, which was nice to see, but it foreshadows the explosion of democratic spots that are going to be bombarding the airwaves in Arizona and other battleground states between now and November.

I have a love hate relationship with politics. I love to follow what's going on. It's a fascinating spectacle. And I'm also truly concerned about many of the issues, most notably the future of the Supreme Court. However, I grow weary of the pettiness of the candidates and their agile sidestepping of questions. I just want someone straightforward and honest, which is probably too much to ask for.

I also hate the game that goes on between Republicans and Democrats. I find it hard to believe that a single intelligent Republican actually thinks that George Bush is a good president, that this is the man that they want to represent them to Americans and the rest of the world. Say what you want about him, he's not exactly a mental giant. I wouldn't hold that against him if he didn't take such long vacations, surround himself with dinosaurs from his father's administration and generally have such a lack of intellectual curiosity. These are hardly his worst offenses. He not only squandered both the surplus and the incredible goodwill that the rest of the world had for the United States after 9/11 but also wasted a golden opportunity to challenge Americans to do something great. Anything great. The way Kennedy challenged Americans to go to the moon, Bush could have challenged Americans to make education of our children the number one priority on the domestic front, but he blew it. He's isolated this country through unilateralism and disengagement from the Kyoto Accords and International Criminal Court. He's played politics of the lowest common denominator by granting everyone in country a 300 dollar bribe/tax refund. He is, in short, horrible president. Yet, Republicans are going to back their horse for all he's worth. You'll never hear Limbaugh or Combs any of the other right wing pundits on FOX ever say a single dispargaging word about Bush. I find it incredible how they or anybody could coalesce around such a person and yet it happens.

Hopefully, history will hold true and a president swept into office after losing the popular vote will not be re-elected to a second term as was the case in the two previous occasions. Because of this history, the Bush first term has been about nothing but getting re-elected. I shutter to think what a second term would be like when the administration has no accountability to the people and has the opportunity to work with a rubber stamp Congress.

Now the Democrats are in something of a mess, but that's always the way the party out of power appears during the primaries.

Not a single vote has been cast in a caucus or primary and yet people are already discussing whether or not Howard Dean can will against Bush. Is Dean going to win the nomination? Perhaps. If history is any lesson, he probably will. It's not just that he has a huge lead in fund raising or that he seems to have tapped into Internet in a way that no other candidate has. It's that he's a former governer. The last two Democratic presidents are both governors (Carter and Clinton). Bush is a former governor. Reagan was a former governor. Dean's closest challengers, in fact almost all the challengers are current and former congressmen. Can you think of the last time a congressman was elected president? It's been a long time. Gore failed in 2000. Dole failed in 1996. Clinton had a slew of congressional opponents in 92, but defeated them all. The road to the presidency is littered with unsuccessful congressional candidates. So maybe Dean is the man.

The wild card is Wesley "Wes" Clark. He's an interesting candidate because he's the only one that can run both as a Washington outsider and someone whom the Bush team can't claim is soft on defense, where so many Dems seem to be vulnerable. Personally I think it should be mandatory for candidates for president to have served in the military which would leave Clark up against Kerry in the race, which would be fun to see. Either of them would make fine commander in chiefs.

What will be really interesting to watch is not Dean, because he's most likely going to win both Iowa and New Hampshire, but who finishes directly behind him. Any candidates that don't finish in the top 3 in either is likely toast. We will be able to bid farewell to Kicinich, Braun, Sharpton (is he really running?) and most likely Lieberman by the end of the month. Then the real fight will start. Hopefully we can actually have a debate instead of what looks to me like a bunch of sniping and bickering over nothing.

Whatever happens, it will be fascinating as always. Hopefully one of the good guys will win.