Kerry screwed up a punch line, so that opened the door for the unscrupulous idiots of the right to simultaneously have a fake orgasm of outrage. He should have apologized for blowing the punch line, so that some might have taken it wrong. And then hit back. Instead, he got the point of his inaction in the face of the Swift Boat Liars, but he mangled that too. He did give a spirited attack, but he missed the small apology he should have made for making the misunderstanding possible.

And John Kerry's a good man, but he just can't move fast on his feet in modern counterpunching. He should leave the scene for the next few days, because he's become a distraction.

And the right-wingers hanging around here can go stuff it, and the superior, know-it-all purists and defeatists who want to wail on Kerry should just go back home and start making some calls. Give to MoveOn or the Democrat of your choice. And don't moan and bitch in these last days before the election.

The old "magic" has really only ever been a cheap parlor trick, as crude and ignorant as the ad against Harold Ford, when it suggests that Ford wants Canada to deal with North Korea -- "They're not busy." Or the speech he gave when he said that Democrats want therapy for Osama. The leadup to the war was simply capitalizing on the moment of national unity by forcing a vote before the elections, thereby giving Democrats a Hobson's Choice and a record to quote on them if the war changed their minds.

I hope he comes down hard, but time will tell. I get the sense they might be playing defense well enough to keep the Senate.

The particular parole program was mentioned, briefly, in a debate between Dukakis and Gore. Gore referred to it generically, as being an unwise law that would release violent felons early. He never brought up Willie Horton. That was done by the GOP. And then, they told you lies so you wouldn't have to feel guilty.

It's not the objection to Massachusett's early release program that's out of bounds, it's finding a black face -- and a particularly ugly one at that -- to put on the ad. In fact, they could have used numerous examples. Guess why they chose a black man?

Compare the good ol' Strom Thurmond and Byrd. Southern politicians in the early days of the civil rights struggle were faced with a difficult job. Their constituents, the whites who could and did vote, wanted them to keep segregation alive. Byrd joined the Klan, briefly, in what he has called his worst mistake. Thurmond, having fathered one and probably more little black babies, left the Democratic party, tried to form the Dixiecrats, and then had the longest filibuster on record -- more than a day on his feet, speaking -- to oppose a civil rights bill in 1958.

Now, white southern politicians were in a difficult bind. Segregation was not going to last. The Democratic Party, which had used the white South for half of its voters, was abandoning the tolerance which even FDR had shown for a very evil system. Even Eisenhower sent in troops. Then Kennedy sent in the troops. Many otherwise progressive politicians, like Faubus and Wallace, got swept up in the "Segregation Forever" crowd. (A slogan invented by -- Strom Thurmond.)

Bird fought for what his people wanted, though he moderated rather quickly, and actually has, since that time, a very good record on civil rights.

So, the white southerner had no place to go. The "party of Lincoln" wouldn't help them; and the Democrats had suddenly gotten principles. Maybe it was TV and the knowledge that the world was watching us. First, he went to Wallace, and that got him a good-sized vote in 1968. Nixon saw that, and what did he do? Did he reiterate that his party, which had had Abe Lincoln as its first president, could not defend a corrupt system? Why, no, now that you ask. All these slogans about the "elite" are the familiar paranoid view of the world. Hey, Bubba, both parties cater to the elite. Nobody cares about your raggedy ass.

But Strom? Goosing women in elevators until his dying day. A Republican. "Segregation now, segregation forever."

Men like the preacher only think of, only talk of homosexuality as if it's some terrible vice, a foul temptation that no good person would fall victim to. Remember, it's like alcoholism, right? It's just a narcissistic sex addiction.

And men living Haggard's kind of life do suffer terribly from exposure.

Truth is, Rev., I don't know anything about your sexuality. Have you been a secret homosexual all these years? Or was it just bi-curiousness? Each time you hired the guy, were you really afraid of burning in hell? Or was it a rip-roaring sexcapade, a brief vacation with your real self before going back to your bed of thorns?

I don't know, obviously, and apparently neither do you. But here's a suggestion: don't pressure yourself. A fair percentage of the male population craves sexual contact with other males. No idea what the percentage is, because I don't think people know themselves, and they wouldn't say it if they did. If you got a phone survey asking whether you were gay, I bet you would explode with anger and hang up.

But if you follow your heart, and search for the pure intention of what you do, eventually you will know, "I am straight. Or I am gay." And you will either return to your wife and child or leave for the Castro district.

And if you decide, yes, I am gay, and if you find a man you love, there's something you will need for your own dignity and the dignity of your lover: you will want to be married.

And we won't let you, you perv. While you were finding yourself, the Marriage Amendment to the Constitution passed as you cruised the steambaths.