Battle of the Candidates: Why are Politicians Discrediting One Another On TV?

Elections are coming up and how do I know this? I'm seeing politicians being discredited in commercials approved by their opposing candidate who were discredited in the commercial before it, followed by supreme court candidates with identical messages. ("I want to put criminals away and change the system... Unlike my opponent.") So with all these difficult decisions to make, I can't help but wonder why so many Americans still don't rush to their local civic center or private school and let the real political party begin. Well, I think we've all the heard the more popular excuses to not vote. "Does my vote my really matter?" I can't answer this, because I honestly don't know. Maybe... Unless it's the case when it came to Florida's little controversy. Then no, those of you who initially gave Bush the edge wasted your time completely. Your time would have been better utilized by going to Space Mountain or Universal Studios. You could have even gone to a Cane's game and given someone a black eye... am I going off topic? What was I talking about? Oh right, votes not couting. As I said before, it's pretty much based on optimisim. If that little American flag sticker is all the reward you need, good for you. But what about those who hope to see results from the tedium you endured in the voting process? I'm talking mainly to those with the last names J through R. I've decided our voting system isn't that appealing to this nation. We are by far, an individualistic culture and I think we need something that does a better job of embracing our selfish ways. So I came up with a voting system that not only should appeal to Americans but also combines two of our favorite pastimes: getting attention and lotteries. Here's how it works, everyone has a week to enter their name into a lottery that is basically going to dwarf Powerball. After all the tickets are collected and put into some kind of shuffler, a winner is announced. What does the lucky voter receive you ask? Why the final decision to select the leader of the free nation of course. Not only that, they'll also get a check for a cool million and not have to pay taxes while their choice is in power. Now I know your asking, Dave, if one person has final say in who's President, doesn't that mean that Nader or Perot could actually have a shot at getting elected? You betcha, so if you want to improve your parties odds, your vote could very well be the one that gets them in. Let's face it, todays voting system is very complicated and disorganized. There are some people out there who think the Electoral College is a trade school. Just because something seems insanely oversimplified doesn't mean it's bad, it just means you'll find out if it's bad a little faster. So why not give a shot in 2008? The only problem I can think of are some paticularly conservative states that might have an ethical bone to pick with it, but with no entry money going towards the aid of public schools, I see no reason to picket. If the cash is really such a bad idea, I have a feeling that going down in history as the person who chose Giuliani as President would be prize enough.

Now there's one last question I know everyone of you are asking. "Dave, why vote for Giuliani when I could just vote for you. Well sadly, I'm not yet old enough to run this country. I mean, I'm finally old enough to rent a Taurus from Enterprise (wild $39/weekend night). Don't worry it's only 13 years. You'll have to go through a couple of warm-up presidents before me but surely they'll do good a job, not as good as I would but maybe as an out of breath second at best. I'm sure whatever the new millionaire decides will be a good choice, or not... either way.