Seems politics is the topic of the day. I've been reading a lot of commentary and articles about the presidential race today. And just thinking about the presidential race ticks me off. Most aspects of politics piss me off, but since the presidential race is the flavor of the season, I'll talk about that.

If you depend on television, there are two candidates running for the office of president. Two. There are two men participating in debates. Most news coverage in all the media is about these two men. If you asked your average Joe who is running for president (if s/he could even answer the question at all), s/he would probably name two people. Two. The two people with the most money get the most attention when they are the ones that can afford to advertise themselves.

I don't know only two candidates for president. I know of five. I also know there are even more than that. I'm not even that up on the situation, and I know there are at least five. All the focus goes to two. You wouldn't know there are other candidates if it were up to television producers. Those third party candidates don't make for good viewing.

I realize most people want to hear what Gore and Bush have to say. They are the major party candidates, and it's reasonable to think most of the time should be devoted to the ones that interest the most people. BUT� that does not mean the other fairly significant candidates should be excluded from coverage. They should not be excluded from debates, especially the first one. I don't believe every jag with a notion to be president should be allowed in the debates, but the more serious contenders should. How are we, the voting public, to know what our choices really are when we've already had them narrowed down to two?

In my little Utopia, the run for office would start with every candidate getting equal coverage. It wouldn't matter how major any candidates were or how much money was behind them or what party's ticket they were on. I know it's unreasonable. I know there's not enough time for all the candidates, and I know most of America really isn't interested in what the little guys have to say. That's my dream. I think that's Democracy. Yes, I am an idealist.

My answer for the real world is to allow more third (and fourth and fifth, etc.) party candidates to participate in the initial debates and to get more equal coverage. I really don't care that it's a pain in the ass to organize it and make changes to the well-oiled machine. More candidates only mean more of a headache when stupid details get in the way. When the color of the background at the debate is important to your candidate is when the whole system has just gotten out of hand. If the American public is going to vote for the other guy because your guy looks bad against a certain color blue, then they deserve what they get. Stop patronizing the people.

This is what short attention spans and apathy will get. If you don't care, someone else will do it for you. Some of us do still care. I care. I want my choice. I don't want a choice of two when there are more. This is like being asked your favorite color, but you can only choose between light grey and dark grey. I still like red, thanks.