Last night's presidential debate was decidedly... unenlightening and boring. Although the town hall format could have brought something new to the table, the game remained virtually unchanged. McCain had a tough job to do, as he entered the debate nine points down in the polls by some reports. Many Americans are now scrutinizing Obama more closely in light of the view that he is the more probable future president, and this is something McCain could have capitalized on - but he didn't, at least not as much as he could have. Both candidates presented their positions rather well, but this is old news - especially when Obama seemed to avoid directly answering questions in favor of steering the debate towards prepped talking points. Important issues came up, but the responses given could have been directly taken from campaign speeches. In what turned out to be a highly conventional debate, we heard the candidates reiterate their positions on health care, taxation, Iran, Russia, and energy. There remained much divergence and some agreement. The economy and current economic conditions were understandably a time-consuming focus.

But despite the need to address the economy in light of significant changes that have taken place since the last time the candidates faced off, I think Tom Brokaw could have made some more interesting decisions regarding question choices. When citizens, and not journalists, are given the opportunity to ask the questions, fascinating issues are bound to come up - and we can get a unique insight into our politicians' characters and lives. In this debate, however, if you agree with Obama's positions, you probably felt like Obama won; likewise, if you went into it a McCain fan, you more than likely believed him to be the winner (case in point: both the FoxNews on-screen poll following the debate and the Drudge Report online poll declared McCain the winner). Did it do anything for the undecideds? I've made up my mind, so I can't be certain, but my guess would be that it didn't do a whole lot in terms of issues.

But maybe the spotlight wasn't on the issues. Maybe the goal was to see the next president being, well, presidential - a goal both candidates succeeded in. Obama was comfortable, said things a lot of people want to hear, and presented himself as empathetic. But as McCain repeatedly brought up, it comes down to rhetoric versus record. So keeping that in mind, and in light of this rather promising debate format that failed to live up to my hopes, I've assembled a list of my own questions, specifically for Senator Obama. Some of these contain issues that I wish McCain had brought up, and some require more than a two-minute response, so poor Tom needs to stop looking at the timer.

Things are getting ugly for the McCain campaign, and the mud slinging is gearing up earlier than the McCain folks would have liked. But mud is not the only thing the McCain campaign is launching through the air; prayers of desperation are coming fast and furious. Here are McCain's top ten Hail Mary's.

10) DNA evidence surfaces that proves Osama Bin Laden and Barack Obama are 14^th cousins twice removed.

9) DNA evidence surfaces linking John McCain as a descendent of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings - McCain initiates media assault accusing Obama of playing the race card against McCain and his 1/2064 African American ancestry.

8) The Flux capacitor is finally discovered - economic and energy woes evaporate - McCain is able return to his strong on war drumbeat.

7) Obama steps out of the Presidential race, revealing that he is in fact the Messiah and that he has decided to honor the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

6) Sarah Palin steps down as VP and is replaced by Dick Cheney's gay daughter. Overnight, radically new coalitions are formed at a head spinning rate, the American Idol crowd loves it and McCain wins in a squeaker.

5) Sarah Palin steps down and John McCain names Chris Angel as his new running mate. Days before the election John McCain appears at the Bellagio in Vegas walking on water.

4) John McCain promises that if elected, he will immediately step down and make Sarah Palin president.
Just enough of the Hillary scorned are wooed by the crafty old Maverick.

3) John McCain breathes an actual fireball during the Tuesday night Presidential debate. Obama is forced to concede that McCain would make an "awesome" Commander in Chief.

2) Acting on a tip from John McCain, George Bush pulls Osama Bin Ladin out of a Pakistani cave - Fox News is there.

1) John McCain accepts defeat in the race for the US Presidency, but makes a heroic comeback as the President of Pakistan. He still has nukes, he still gets to fight terrorism and he gets to wear a uniform again.

While certainly all eyes (including mine) will be on how Sarah Palin performs against Joe Biden's extensive foreign policy experience in tomorrow's vice presidential debate, I'm counting on the Democratic candidate for the entertainment. There's no telling what he might say - maybe something along the lines of, "You cannot go into a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent"? Maybe he'll remind us that "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America"? Or perhaps he'll continue to damage his own running mate's campaign by contradicting it directly through the claim that "we're not supporting clean coal". Hey, I'd even enjoy hearing one of his more baffling comments, like the statement that his wife having a doctorate is "a problem". I hope, though, that he can refrain from asking a paraplegic man to stand up for all to recognize. It is fortunate that debates, by their nature, are unscripted - I'd hate to see Biden have to forfeit his vice presidential run due to plagiarizing the speech of a British politician. All in all, I'm looking forward to Biden being Biden - and glad that it will be on national television, for all to see. (This, of course, Biden can liken to FDR's television appearance in 1929. Oops.)

Since it can be difficult to discern sarcasm in print, let me just explicitly state that I am not being sarcastic about being entertained, plain and simple. Before all the die-hard Biden fans out there attack me with comments galore and eager defenses, let me just emphasize my genuineness - I think he's a hoot! In the words of Nancy Pelosi (although in all seriousness, I don't agree with her brushing off Biden's awkward joke about his wife), "lighten up!" When you believe, as I do, that this election is about choosing the lesser of two evils, there is a serious need for some comic relief. And although Stephen Colbert is helpful, he is no substitute for the candidates themselves - one of whom, might I add, has visited 57 states, with one more to go.

 Almost everyday I receive emails and phone calls from friends and colleagues who have fallen for some story they heard on the McCain Noise Machine. They wonder if we will end up with a McCain/Palin administration.  (After all, George Bush was allowed to be President not once but TWICE, a fact that still seems inconceivable.) 

Over and over I hear myself explaining why Obama is the best leader for these turbulent times, so have I've distilled these discussions into a few key issues.

1.  Obama has the resolve, intellect, and insight to be an effective President. 

2.  Obama understands the complexity of the foreign policy issues that the next President will face. He understands that in addition to a strong military, the importance of dialogue and diplomacy are crucial to resolving global crisis.

3.  Obama knows its 2008 and not 2004 or 1973.  The country has changed and Obama gets this. He has given a voice to the millions of Americans who understand that the mistakes of the past eight years must not continue.

4.  Most Americans with half a brain do understand that this election is not an "American Idol" entertainment vehicle and are able to grasp the difference between real issues and political spin.

5.  Obama has given us the opportunity to elect a  President who will bring hope and inspiration to move beyond the current domestic, economic and geopolitical quagmire.

The Bush Administration's plans for a speedy bailout of Wall Street seem to have hit a speed bump with a Congress possessing a newly installed spine, or at least a sense of curiosity about what they're being asked to approve. The administration's proponants of the plan are being compared to used-car dealers and there are reactions of disgust and distrust from both parties in both houses of Congress.

Senators McCain and Obama both gave speeches today outlining their problems with the plan. McCain broke his objections down to five points, where Obama focussed on four. I was particularly happy with Senator McCain's insistance that the management of those companies seeking assistance commit to capping their income at the appropriate level for federal employees.

In my view, the problems with the administration's proposals came in two areas. First, their repeatedly inaccurate crying of wolf for the last seven years, has left them with zero credibility. Second, there were no consequences for anyone but the taxpayers.

Fortunately, Congressional ears now seem to finally be resistant to the crying of wolf. Additionally, everyone running for office seems to understand that the consequences of this economic disaster must be laid somewhere, anywhere, but at the feet of the voting taxpayers. Yes, we'll all pay in the long run, whether or not any kind of bailout passes, but Congress seems to understand that we should not be alone.

More on this topic is in a particularly good piece by Washington Post op-ed columnist Eugene Robinson.

Matthew Dowd, who led President Bush's campaign for reelection in 2004, recently told the New York Times that "The only things that are going to change the equation of the election are the four debates." This is due to the plethora of partisan and biased media sources that the public is confronted with every day. As Dowd pointed out, "The average person has 90 channels. They get all the dot-coms. They all get a newspaper. There is so much flow of information that they just begin to discount it all."

And for that, we can breathe a sigh of relief, although I fear that Dowd might give the average person too much credit in saying the media will be depreciated. But if the most influential factor in this election will be the candidates' own voices - through debates and interviews - then I hope the moderators and interviewers will break with the improprieties of the past several months and truly give both sides an even playing field.

It was with great anticipation that I viewed Sarah Palin's speech, given Wednesday at the Republican National Convention. I was not disappointed: the vice presidential candidate addressed real issues and presented herself as someone of conviction who would stand her ground rather than bow to the powers that be in Washington. She cleverly used her own experience (as a "community organizer") and beliefs ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery") to undermine Obama's rhetoric. All the while, she struck me as likable and a real promoter of change. Fortunately, she did much in the way of presenting the American people with her own accomplishments, something a large percentage of the news articles I have read conveniently fail to mention. (Her previous praise in the liberal media seems to be left forgotten.)

After researching her activities in government and listening to her speech, I extrapolate the following about Palin: She stands up to her opponents and promotes real reform where reform is needed. She won the gubernatorial race in Alaska on the basis of desiring to clean up government. She is a tough cookie who has opposed own party when necessary. She values reducing America's dependency on foreign oil by expanding oil and natural development at home, but at the same time, she is opposed to big oil and supports higher taxes on oil company profits. She sought to put the money gained by the government (through oil revenue) back into the hands of Alaskans. Throughout her gubernatorial stint, Palin has remained true to her word and down-to-earth. She sold a private jet, purchased with government money, on eBay. She has family serving in the military, and with her son set to deploy in a few short days she understands the general heart-felt desire to bring our troops home while at the same time aware that it would be foolish to forfeit on those grounds alone, while the Iraqi people remain in such a precarious security situation.

Several weeks ago, I decided to call my African American friends across the country -- some of whom I hadn't seen in years.  I was shocked to learn how many of them, especially those old enough to remember 1968, were very concerned for Obama's well being. Since I had not lived their lives, I knew my arguments held very little weight with them, and I sensed they were figuratively "patting me on the head as a well meaning but basically naïve little liberal."  They feared he would be asked to pay too great a price and they let pragmatism bury their optimism. Perhaps Obama's acceptance speech last night has put their fears to rest, and they are able to embrace the hope that I feel.

My heritage is English, French, Scotch-Irish, Danish and German.  I doubt that there is a drop of Black blood flowing in my veins, but in my heart I am so thrilled, so thrilled...for what this country has done.   Yes I'm also a woman of Hillary's generation and I am gratified that she was an oh so serious contender.   The next time I truly believe it will be a no-brainer -- a woman can and will be a candidate.  A woman can and will be President.

But, here we are, and just look at the changes Obama's candidacy has already wrought.  I don't mean to sound presumptuous to say I sense a soul-deep pride among blacks of all ages. I see evidence all around me- at my swimming pool, at my gym, in my church, in a predominately conservative town...(really...I know we have 2,500 registered Democrats in Coronado, but I drove up and down every street and it's true...we actually DO have the only Obama yard sign in town.)   But yesterday, I noticed a young African American working out at the Community Center. He was the only one of his race among a sea of white, but he carried himself with such dignity, the epitome of self-containment.  His time has indeed come.   

In light of the excitement and anticipation surrounding Hillary Clinton's speech at this week's Democratic National Convention, some may have missed the short address delivered by Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, a few hours earlier. In her short oration, Richards praised Barack Obama's commitment to women's health care and admonished his opponent by pointing out that the presumptive Republican candidate "voted against real sex education, against affordable family planning and, if elected, John McCain has vowed to appoint Supreme Court justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade."

She has little to worry about. Roe v. Wade is here to stay and come mid-November, I suspect we will all be referring to her preferred candidate as president-elect Obama. Nevertheless, Richards brought to mind an interesting question: aside from being generally pro-choice and believing that the issue of when life begins is above his "pay grade" (that certainly doesn't leave the rest of us any hope of understanding the issue, especially when he starts earning a president's salary), what do we know about Obama's position on abortion? The most revealing way to answer this question is to take a look at the senator's voting record.

Planned Parenthood is right in endorsing Obama as the candidate who will stand by the organization's principles, most notably, a woman's right to choose. He has repeatedly shown his support for the expansion of abortion rights by, for example, voting against bills that would prohibit tax funding of the procedure. This is in spite of stating at the recent Saddleback Faith Forum that he would like to reduce the number of abortions that take place in this country. But perhaps most disturbing is Obama's record on partial-birth abortion.

Hopeful, fearsome, Riefenstahlian propaganda or choreography of the new world order -- the opening and closing ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics were nothing if not overwhelming. The conventions have a tough primetime act to follow. No sky jogging, no LEDs, no day-glo lycra -- just a man, a mic, and a message. Obama will surely deliver a rousing speech, McCain will sleepwalk through a wooden Minneapolis extravaganza; and then we'll go right back to flash polls and daily sniping.

Made for TV spectacle has a death grip on presidential politics. This is no novel claim or original discovery, but it feels particularly sad and final this time around. Careerist pundits are set on full-thrust vomit mode, so that even the occasional insight is tough to take. Ideas are not valued. Those millions and millions of dollars raised by both candidates need to be spent, and network and cable channels will oblige with a guaranteed ninth inning thriller. 

Just like the O.J. trial created junkies for courtroom entertainment; we now crave the adrenaline rush of the 2000 Gore/Bush election. Both campaigns, the press, poll workers, vote counters and voting machine manufacturers all know that anything goes and anything can happen. What parts of this election will end up in a courtroom? I don't need hope in a candidate as much as I need renewed hope in the process. Any more punditry on my part and the self loathing will finally be unbearable.  So...