While I agree that the republicans and democrats are beholden to the same power elite benefactors, this election offers a clear choice. It is difficult to argue that McCain offers a better choice, using any criteria.

As for Obama's modest resume, Earl Warren had never served as a judge before his appointment as Chief Justice and, I think, is widely considered to have been a great Chief Justice.

There is also the example of Lincoln and many, many others.

You seem to choose to expect the worst, while others are hoping for far better. I understand cynicism, and that as we grow older many of us, me included, become more and more cynical. None-the-less, Obama gives me hope.

One thing of which I think we can all be certain is that Obama will appoint competent folks to his administration, not cronies such as has done President Cheney. Which really has been the big difference between the Clinton and Cheney administrations.

We'll see if your negativity will be justified.

I really don't see how a new party would make a difference until the electorate becomes more interested and engaged in the actual governing of the country. The tools are available to us, we must only choose to use them; but I also think that with broadband more tools can be made available to us to facilitate our greater engagement.

I am one who believes that the power elite, monied interests, or whatever label one wishes to use, have always controlled the political process since the founding of the nation. The rich wrote the Constitution and gave us the electoral college because they didn't trust the unwashed masses. Actually it's been that way since folks settled down into communities to agricultural pursuits.

That, however, doesn't mean that things can't be changed by an informed, engaged public.

I would not presume to change your opinions or your prejudices, but I don't mind attempting to put forth some of my own. As Obama, himself, has mused, he is a sort of Rorschach figure upon whom people tend to project their own hopes and beliefs. To the extent that that is true, he cannot be held responsible for the intensity of love, support and faith that he has inspired in his supporters. I am amazed myself how much I love him and fear for his safety, considering I have never met him. McCain's advisers, therefore, were correct in "warning" that he is a celebrity, but so was their conservative hero Reagan and they didn't seem to mind it then.

I don't know what you think about such historic figures as Gandhi, Ronald Reagan or Nelson Mandela, but they are also people who were raised to an almost cult-like status by the hopes and dreams that people projected onto them. I am suggesting that the elevation of such a leader is an amazing dance between the intensity of focus that the leader projects in attempting to make a break with the past, married to the needs and aspiratios of a huge number of people.

My own feeling is that if Obama winds up disappointing us, it will be less because he has mislead us about what he hopes to achieve, than that he finds the burden he assumes to be both far more difficult that he can imagine, than anyone could solve, coupled with the usual suspects of apathy and vicious clinging to power which precludes progress in every age of man.

As Obama, himself, has mused, he is a sort of Rorschach figure upon whom people tend to project their own hopes and beliefs. To the extent that that is true, he cannot be held responsible for the intensity of love, support and faith that he has inspired in his supporters.

He is also a Rorschach figure upon whom people tend to project their own fears. Although Seaton has recognized the former in others, he has not recognized the latter in himself.