I think that one of the most intense responses that can be generated after reading this article is that the political future of Egypt is in limbo. If one of Mubarak's chief advisors can make a serious run towards a leadership position in Egypt, it reflects how volatile the political leadership situation is in the country. It also reflects how there is a fundamental difference between leading a revolution and leading a country. I think that a year ago, there was a euphoria and a sense of absolute wonder in terms of the Arab Spring and how dictatorships that ruled out of fear and brutality were being toppled with swift and definite popular uprisings. Now, the haze of that moment has worn off, and the nasty and ugly business of who will politically rule the nation has taken hold. It is out of this that someone like Suleiman can contemplate running. The fact that there is no clear political leadership and questions being raised about what is being offered reflects how democracy is uncomfortable. It also demonstrates how individuals will need to have a stake in its formation. If they don't because they are turned off by its ugliness, the same forces that were overthrown could return, ensuring that all progress and hopes are dashed. I think that Suleiman's potential for both running and being elected represents this and forms some of my most elemental responses to the article.