The Not Debate

Tonight, a nation will tune in as we watch the first Presidential Debate of the 2004 campaign season. Two men will face off on the issues, each expressing their views, which starkly contrasts categorically. We will all be educated on the very important topics that affect our lives, and what takes place tonight will have a profound impact on how we vote come November 2nd.

NOT!!!

I'd like to think that tonight's debate will matter in how people vote. I'd like to think that I'd learn something valuable about issues that matter to me as a United States citizen. But undoubtedly, I will wake up tomorrow as frustrated as ever about the apparent lack of substance that this political race has conjured up. Furthermore, I'm sure to be outrageously frustrated at the "debate" since I'm sure that no true debate is possible, considering the 30+ pages of rules that the "debate" is supposed to follow.

This Presidential Presentation (as CNN's Lou Dobbs has dubiously dubbed it) will
be so scripted that one might wonder whether or not we are really watching the
candidates or animatronic likenesses of them spouting pre-recorded responses.

The debate will last 90 minutes. A specific number of questions will be asked to each candidate. The candidate will then have 2 minutes to answer the question and the other candidate will then be allowed to give a 90 second rebuttal. No camera shots are to be given of a candidate who doesn't have the floor at that moment. Finally, no candidate is to interject while the other is speaking.

Now I don't know what debates you've seen in the past, but I know that this doesn't qualify as a debate based on what I've seen all my life.

Another reason that this debate sucks is because there are at least four other Presidential candidates (including Green Party, Libertarian Party and Constitutional Party candidates) out there who really have opposing views and are actually willing to discuss the issues to the end of educating the American voting population. The most prominent being the Independent candidate Ralph Nader who, in my opinion, deserves a place on the debating stage.

I hate to blame one side for such silliness, but anybody with open eyes (indeed, open ears) knows that most of these rules have been established by the Bush campaign. The Kerry campaign agreed to them because he needs the opportunity to look good versus Bush somehow.

Clearly, the other candidates were left out because they might actually say something worth listening to. Furthermore, they might say something that really contrasts with what Bush has to say (unlike Kerry who seems to disagree with Bush...but not really). And one of the greatest new sins in this country is to say something that opposes Bush, because you're then seen as unpatriotic and as a traitor. Needless to say, tonight's debate will further prove to me why a two-party system sucks.

So, if you're seeking to gain something significant by watching the debate tonight, I hate to break it to you, but you won't. And if you do, you probably haven't been watching the pathetic news coverage on the "Race to the White House" during the past few weeks, because we will certainly get a heavy, compacted dose of the same rhetoric that has been airing 24-7 for two months straight.

Although I feel like we all might actually come out dumber after witnessing such chicanery (a la Adam Sandler's Billy Madison), I do think everyone should watch. Who knows? Bush might actually face reality, and Kerry might actually decide on a position. But whatever you do, don't bet on that!

-Maelstrom