I have "Electile Dysfunction"

None of the candidates excite me.

I've been using this phrase since the start of the primaries. I could probably use it for every voting opportunity I've had in my lifetime.

In 2004, I voted against Bush. I saw him - and still do - as a jackass without an original thought in his minuscule mind. A profane example of cronyism and prodigal son gone awry. I wasn't a big fan of Kerry - I mean, he is a tax and spend Democrat, after all - but I didn't think I could take another 4 years of a man who viewed global warming and evolution as myths and wanted to teach Creationism - a religious doctrine; a philosophy - in science classes.

In 2000, I voted against Al Gore. Even then, I viewed GW as a mental midget - someone who would lose a game of chess to my dogs - and I had a very hard time casting a vote for an imbecile because I value intelligence so highly. My problem with Al Gore was that I saw him as the petulant child who felt he deserved the job because he was a veep and his father was a senator. I felt he would honestly believe he was the only person who could solve a problem and would not consult with anyone. My theory - which proved correct, initially - was that Bush knows he is a moron and would surround himself with smart people who would make decisions for him. When he appointed Meg Whitman, Tommy Thompson and Colin Powell, I sat back and gloated...until they began to quit. I couldn't blame them. I should have seen it coming. I can't work for a moron, either.

In 1996, I voted against Bob Dole. Bob Dole wasn't happy about that. Bob Dole thought he was a better man than Bill Clinton. Bob Dole was a respectable man with a respectable past. Bob Dole was dull, cranky, and referred to himself in the third person! Clinton wasn't a bad president. I just couldn't understand how a man with such power and charisma end up with such UGLY women! Come on! Jack Kennedy gets Marilyn Monroe and Clinton gets Monica Lewinsky? If his affair had been with Sharon Stone, or even Molly Ringwald, I would have CAMPAIGNED for the man. You can't trust a man with such horrible judgement to run a country...he was still better than Bob Dole.

2008? Well, let's see. On one hand, we have a Marxist, Fascist and gifted orator who has no record of accomplishing anything as a politician (almost sounds like Hitler). On the other hand, we have a cranky old troll who's ready to invade the first country who calls him a name behind his back...or remembers his own words better than he does. One side wants to take money from people who actually drive the economic engine of America and give it to people who procreate future criminals. The other side wants to let the wealthy keep their money so they can help fund wars against countries with natural assets that increase the profitability of their companies. We have a man who's ideas on wealth distribution are so egregious that he creates a disincentive to work, running against a man who selects a running mate better suited to hosting a Miss BassMasters competition than being Vice President of America.

When do I actually get to vote FOR someone? I'm having to choose between a person who I firmly and sincerely believe is the Manchurian candidate, and a person who's judgement is worse than a Los Angeles jury.

Is this really the best America has to offer? I'm praying this is like the NFL during a strike year. It isn't the highest quality, but at least it isn't painful to watch. Good luck to everyone, regardless of the outcome.