Perhaps you could convince Ryan Chapman to actually engage in some serious discussion about the pros and cons of Howard Dean at the head of the Democratic National Committee, and allow us all to move away from the inane, unproductive tripe that seems to be passing for political commentary in the Collegian these days.
Serious discourse, such as actually analyzing a view or two that Dean has, as opposed to merely characterizing them as "hippy rants."
Serious discourse, such as an attempt to recognize that "common folk" includes people on both sides of the political spectrum, and even those of us who support Dean and some of his views.
Serious discourse, perhaps even including a concrete example of why it's "confusing" that the Democratic Party would be seeking to reorganize after the last few elections, as opposed to resorting to Sen. John Kerry bashing. That a major political party is seeking to reinvent itself after two failed presidential bids is hardly confusing to anyone who stops and thinks for a second.
That the Democrats would choose Dean, with his demonstrated ability to organize and mobilize on a grass roots level, is not particularly confusing.
That the Democrats would choose Dean, and in doing so move away from the unsuccessful Republican-light version of politics that they've been pushing, is not confusing. In fact, the only aspect of Dean as the chairman that is confusing is that the bulk of the "Dean for Chairman?! Are you CRAZY?!?!" complaints that seem to be going around are coming from Republicans. It kind of makes me think that the Democrats might be on the right track.
Senior history and anthropology major