I found an article over on Wired about a grassroots campaign called Draft Clark. As the name suggests, the aim of this movement is to "draft" General Clark as the Democrat candidate for the next presidential election.

From the article:

So what is it about Clark that inspires supporters? The group's radio ads tout the Arkansas native's stellar resumé: decorated war veteran; four-star general; Rhodes Scholar; West Point graduate, top in his class; licensed investment banker.

That certainly sounds impressive, although personally, only "Rhodes Scholar" and "top in his class" sound like accomplishments relevant for a President. I'm not entirely convinced that a general or an investment banker would be most suitable for the position of President.

But...

His criticism of the Bush administration's foreign policy, especially the war in Iraq, won Clark a lot of fans among Democrats. But he says he's also concerned about a range of domestic issues, from unemployment to civil rights to global warming.

In general (no pun intended), I personally think the movement isn't all that of a bad idea. I remember seeing Clark on CNN as the supreme commander of NATO forces during Kosovo, and he struck me as being a sensible and highly intelligent leader. Considering the current climate, someone with a strong military backing would, for better or for worse, be more appealing to the general US population as well. Finally, if it came down to Clark or Bush, I would vote for Clark hands down, no questions asked (but then, I'd probably say the same for anyone who isn't Bush).

Fortunately, I've been mostly TV-free for the last 5 years, but some people are less fortunate. The Guardian has an article about TV's effect on Bhutan.

Four years ago, Bhutan, the fabled Himalayan Shangri-la, became the last nation on earth to introduce television. Suddenly a culture, barely changed in centuries, was bombarded by 46 cable channels. And all too soon came Bhutan's first crime wave - murder, fraud, drug offences.

Although it may never be proven conclusively that TV causes many of society's ills, I can testify based on my own experiences, that no harm can come from the lack of TV. I would further argue that a lifestyle without TV enhances creativity, intellectual development, sexual performance, and unassisted flying capabilities. Well, okay, maybe not the sexual performance and flying, but you get my drift...

Well, a certain friend told me that I should get an account with Friendster, so I did. I'm still not entirely sure what the big deal is, but well hey, y'all might want to join the crowd if you haven't already, just so that I can look like I have friends.