Do the Democrats want Moore?
In a recent interview with the Guardian, Michael Moore stated that he "has not publicly endorsed Kerry." Moore sees it as his role to show the deficiencies in Bush's presidency rather than endorse another, which is rather incongruous with his endorsement of Nader in the last elections and Wesley Clarke in the current Democratic campaign. In fact, I'm sure Moore would, in private, be rather critical of Kerry, who holds some very similar policy decisions to Bush, and is also from a very cushy background. (Anybody catch the CNN Presents... special on Kerry this weekend, showing clips of him sailing with JFK is the Hamptons?)

But the question is, would the Democrats want an association with Moore? Wesley Clarke found out rather quickly that Moore's aggressive stance is often more a problem than a service, and Moore's endorsement would be simple fodder for the Republican War Room's cannons. With every vote counting, and the country as polarised on Moore as they are on Bush, a Moore endorsement may be too heavy a burden to carry for the Democrats. Thus, no official invite for Moore to the Democratic convention, but rather an invitation as a guest of former President Carter who, as CNN so deftly enunciated it, is more famous for what he has done after his presidency than during it.