Easy - Lyndon Johnson.  The turnaround he made on racial issues clearly marks him as a man who could learn from his mistakes and burn political capital on important issues.  And he made plenty of mistakes. 

Easy, an America-raised Mao, preferably growing-up in a rural area.

Although it’s difficult to imagine what an American Mao might be like, i think, like his Chinese counter-part, he would be heavy on internal security while thinking long-term about how to best project influence regionally and globally.  He also wouldn’t be afraid to foster new, radical ideas within the platform.

And, he’d make damn sure everyone stuck to the Party Line.

That all said, i like Dean.

Richard Branson (head of the Virgin Empire):  he’s a libertarian, a successful entrepreneur, had planned to visit Saddam Hussein and talk him into leaving Iraq ("It was perhaps the worst foreign policy decision since Suez. You shouldn’t have to maim or kill 200,000 people to get rid of one individual."), has championed gay rights since day 1, believes the little guy at the bottom of the ladder deserves as much respect as the guy at the top (if not more), and promotes comprehensive sex ed.

How do you manage to hold up both Che Guevara and John Locke? John Locke believed that property rights and Guevara is a marxist. Those are two diametrically opposed philosophies: income redistribution vs. keep your property.

Liberals may enjoy pretending that they are the intellectual heirs to John Locke, but the only connection is in their desire to legalize drugs.

How about John McCain? He’s got bipartisan appeal…

What’s so bad about legalising drugs?

P.S. I’ve never called myself a liberal. I hate labels.

The label doesn’t matter. The point is that John Locke’s philosophy cannot be reconciled with either Che Guevera or the Democratic party. You can’t respect property rights and support income redistribution at the same time.

What’s so bad about legalising drugs?

That is easy, I don’t want my kids to turn into a stoner. I knew too many of them when I spent my winters as a snowboard bum in Lake Tahoe. But that is not my decision to make. As a conservative I support limited government and natural rights even when I disagree with how people use them.

I took the question to mean not so much the literal person, but their personality.  Otherwise, in reality, we’d have very limited options.

Justin --

When it comes down to it, if your kid wants to be a stoner, he/she will do it whether it’s legal or not.

At least if it’s legal, there’s not as much of an allure to it.

That is easy, I don’t want my kids to turn into a stoner. I knew too many of them when I spent my winters as a snowboard bum in Lake Tahoe. But that is not my decision to make. As a conservative I support limited government and natural rights even when I disagree with how people use them.

Yes, we don’t need more stoners, like, um… I don’t know, ah… Carl Sagan? Not all people who smoke weed are stoners, just like not all people who drink are alcoholics. Should we ban drinking because we wouldn’t want our sons to be become alcoholics? I’ve never used any illegal drugs and rarely ever drink, but I find it amusing that most of the people who are against legalizing pot have no problems drinking a beer or smoking a cigar, doesn’t that make these people hypocrites, after all alcohol and weed are both drugs. I guess my Libertarian beliefs are showing… What was the topic again? Oh yeah, I would loved to have seen Isaac Asimov, Frank Zappa or Carl Sagan do something political. It would be nice to have a leader that has some intelligence, something which both parties seriously lack- hence forth my being a Libertarian.

Harry Houdini.

Bertrand Russell.

G.B. Shaw

maybe even Wilde.....

Houdini! Brilliant! Never would have though of him in a million years!

Can’t you just picture the things he’d do as Dem Leader:

If I’m elected, I will make this budget deficit disappear [snaps fingers] like that!

Man, I’d vote for him like that [snaps fingers].

I think Dean is the right man for the job right now.

But if this is a fantasy version, then definitely Thomas Paine.

Yes, we don’t need more stoners, like, um… I don’t know, ah… Carl Sagan? Not all people who smoke weed are stoners, just like not all people who drink are alcoholics. Should we ban drinking because we wouldn’t want our sons to be become alcoholics?

Did you even read my post? In particular the part where I said: “But that is not my decision to make. As a conservative I support limited government and natural rights even when I disagree with how people use them.”

You may be interested in doing some research on the effects of long term marijuana use. Here and here are two results from a quick PubMed search. Is dabbling in a little marijuana use a problem? Probably not. But as a soon-to-be parent I’d rather that my children dabble in books, sports and music than drugs.

A quick anecdotal followup: I’ve known a lot more Jeff Spicolis than Carl Sagans.

Not all democrats see Dean through rose-colored glasses: Stop Howard Dean.

I feel Dean would help end the too-close-to-call elections we’ve been having.  Unfortunately he’d do it by triggering a Republican landslide.

Incidentally, Fox news loves Dean.  They call him “God’s gift to conservatives.”

Robert A. Heinlin (I know I probably spelled it wrong).

George W. Bush.

Heh, just kidding, I bet you all thought I went crazy for a moment.

Seriously, I think that the best president would be a complete “nobody” just your average guy off the street.  I would choose the homeless guy that lived around the corner by the subway station by my grandparent’s house. 

However, if I have to stick to well known historical figures I would go with Richard Pryor.  Yeah, the president needs to be an ex-crackhead whom immortalized the word “motherfucker”.

*decrepitoldfool parrots gop talking points from a year and a half ago*

Most people who support Governor Dean don’t use “rose-colored glasses.” The ones wearing them seem to be the ones that the best way to beat the republicans and their nasty little toadies is to be more like them.  Because it’s worked so well in the past.

But, some people just don’t like him and there’s nothing you can do about it.  But since becoming the DNC chairman, he’s done some pretty damned effective leadering.  Including:

Setting a fundraising pace that threatens Terry McAuliff’s six-month, off year record in 2001.  Mostly through small donations.  Sure, some of the beltway consultants are peeved that their corporate clients don’t get as much face time partly because they aren’t the focus of the DNC under Dean.  But also because of:

Traveling the country, talking to state parties, setting up organizations in red states, including Mississippi, the reddest of all.  Meeting with all the state party chairs (people who have had a hard time getting “face-time” with more corporate-minded national chairs.)

You may not like him, but he’s doing a hell of a job.  He may be a little blunt for the milquetoast beltway dems and failure junkies, but he’s doing more than just taking republican abuse with a smile and an “aww shucks.”

If you don’t like it, all I can say is that it sucks to be you, then.

Sorry my Dean references weren’t recent enough for you, Lobo.  And I neither like or dislike Dean personally; I have an opinion about how big a target he would be which is a different thing.

Watch Fox news for a few nights.  Republicans update their talking points everytime Dean speaks and believe me, they love him.  They want him in charge of the Democratic party come next election.  That doesn’t strike you as just a tiny bit of a warning signal?

My son has a theory that our system practically guarantees close elections when divisions run deep.  Scary if you consider that it’s the undecided ones who then determine the outcome.  You know, the non-reading, entertainment junkies…

I should mention I’d be very happy to be wrong about Dean, since the Dems are obviously betting on him.

I’m already getting depressed about the next election.  Plan ahead, I always say…

Scary if you consider that it’s the undecided ones who then determine the outcome.  You know, the non-reading, entertainment junkies…

C’mon, DOF!!!  I’m one of those anyone-but-Bush types who voted straight party last election.  Those neo-cons are scary folks.  Anyway, while I may be an “entertainment junkie”, I do read… some… lol If the GOP fielded Ron Paul for president, I would be sorely tempted to vote for him.
Bo$$, I would agree with you on Che, but probably for different reasons.  He is a little too socialist for me, but we certainly could use a revolutionary right about now.

My hope is that the real conservatives in the GOP (not the Bushie wingnuts now in power) will wrench the Republican party back towards its roots of fiscal responsibility, and nominate John McCain.

While I disagree with lots of his positions, he is the Dean of the Republicans- honest and not afraid to speak his mind.  That would be most refreshing.

Warbi, I was “anybody but Bush” too and voted straight Democrat just because the wingnuts scare me too.  And I didn’t think you are an entertainment junkie.  They don’t come here anyway - they’re reading blogs about Survivor and Fear Factor. (shudder!)

I would vote for John McCain in a heartbeat.  Well, probably four or five heartbeats - I like to fill in the little circles neatly.  I like him much better than Dean. 

Any candidate whose every position I agreed with would be far too radical to have any realistic chance of running.

2006, Democrats retake Congress, despite their own predictions of self-defeat and general lack of energetic passion.  Formation of a “Democratic Shadow Cabinet” as a newsmaker foil to the Republican Administration, issueing statements and newsconfrences on various unpublicized Bush policy-gaffes and disasters.

Joe Biden will give Hillary Clinton a run for her money for in 2008.

The Big Issues of 2008:
[] domestic security (again)
[] foreign defense policy (finally)
[] healthcare costs (discussed with depth)
[] long-term economy (sans ideology)

Buck the fad of a dying culture; Dare to dream with hope. The future is a lot brighter than some people might have us believe.