I would launch a clear skies initiative that would assure air quality and a healthy forests act that would keep our national forests strong and healthy. Not all the details have been worked out yet, but I would have the best and brightest advisers to help me develop all the specifics.

Since, as you say on your own blog, this is pretty much your inaugural examination of the US elections, I will caution you to not let any activist’s commentary tempt you to get caught up in their own delusions of what is actually politically important at this point and what is not.

Consider this math……2.3M viewers tuned into the Dem debate in SC, 3.6M viewers watched Sponge Bob and 5M watched wrestling. Deride the sensibilities of the American public if you will, but don’t let liberal activist Paul Krugman lead you to believe that Edward’s issuing of a position paper on universal healthcare means didly squat to anyone beyond hardly 1% of people who will vote in 2008.

This election campaign was pushed up solely for the sake of lining up big contributors before the other guy did. The media seems largely clueless on this and so is haplessly contenting themselves reporting on all sorts of “issues” that are total yawners to the gargantuan “average voter” bloc.

Krugman writes pieces for an ever-dwindling number of NYT Op-Ed readers. Edward’s campaign, in turn, is currying the favor of an arguably growing, but still proportionately non-determinant voting bloc. Playing to win the favor of those groups too much is likely a pyrrhic victory over the long haul.

HRC is a lot of things, but never dumb relative to political calculation. At this early stage of the game, the likely events that will determine the 2008 election outcome have not even happened yet. Why commit to anything at this juncture? It may hurt more than it helps.