Rook points out a Washington Monthly article that reads, in part, "It's fine to hammer away on domestic issues with specific target groups. It's fine for John Edwards to focus on the two Americas. But anyone who thinks the primary message of Kerry's campaign should be anything other than national security is just deluding themselves. To paraphrase James Carville, 'It's 9/11, stupid.'"

It's a sad statement that our society is prioritizing risk management over improving quality of life. Even more so because all we do in America, it seems, is reactive (not proactive) risk management. Getting interested in homeland security after an attack, not in response to warnings sitting on the president's desk, for instance. Why don't we try and look ahead, to what's going to be f'cking up our country in few years, not just at what f'ed it up in 2001?

But what do I know? I'd like to hear about a campaign issue other than war once in a while, so obviously I am out of touch with the American electorate.

For one, today's Doonesbury seems spot on:


And just a quick glance at the Letters to the Editor section in even a "blue" state shows the public's growing indifference towards health care (got a societal problem? Blame immigrants!) and public schools.

Generations from now, everyone but the super-rich will be undereducated, underinsured, and underemployed -- but gosh, we sure will be SAFE!

Nine weeks to go. Let's grow some priorities. Fast. Even talking about Iraq instead of Vietnam would be a massive improvement.