I just wish that the people we elect to represent us (at all levels of government) would display more skills in doing their jobs. I think many people who run for office think it is some easy job that anyone can do. It takes real talent and real skills to do those jobs well, whether it is a school board position, a state representative or one of the one hundred people elected to the Senate. Many times voters choose a name that sounds familiar or they vote for the "pretty face' or just give their loyalty to a political party and let it decide; rarely do we voters think about what skills it takes to do the job. No wonder candidates take advantage of us! While I don't agree that the two Presidential candidates are so alike that it doesn't matter who wins, I am really afraid a significant number of voters will agree with you.

Excellent article Kennesaw :)

Thanks for this opinion. Indeed, there is no substantial differences between the 2 major parties candidates and what they have to offer to the voters. We'll have the same type of regime whomever is elected coming November. One that favors corporations to the detriment of the people.

Your column is labeled as being 'local.' Could this be better defined? Where are you located? Regards.

I think you need to recheck your perspective. My view (from the middle) is that I see a lot of difference between the two candidates and parties. From your reactionary perspective, they look the same because neither is conservative enough for your tastes.

Churchill said that " .... democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…". It may not be pretty, but I'm happy I was lucky enough to be born and raised in this country. Sorry you don't feel the same.

Despite how you may feel, they are both professional politicians, and this very aspect forces them to do the same thing: win at all costs. What both have in their favor is that very few people will spend the time and effort to fully understand their positions and the impact those will have on our society. Few of us will actually read & understand legislation language (proposed & passed), executive orders, appointments, etcetera. Most of us simply consume what somebody has summarized for us (friends, talk radio, TV, web sites, authors, etc.) and most of us will gravitate toward those sources that align with how we feel. The candidates rely on this, as carefully constructed and well-funded marketing are crafting the messages that drive us to advocate and vote in very specific ways. Just look at nearly every post on this site- nobody goes after the raw data, they just reference what somebody else has packaged for them. But in all fairness, the level of effort to truly understand is quite high, and few of us (including myself) will ever be willing to do it… and that is a big win for both candidates.

Let us look at taxes. Specifically the Fed Income Tax. We can agree that both the President & Mr Romney have paid the Taxes that they were Legally Required to pay. The question is: To what extent have they gamed the system to reduce their taxes and at what point is it Unethical to do so I have no doubt that many would say that it is ethical to do Anything to reduce personal tax burdens. Fortunately, some of those things while legal, ie) moving overseas, preclude running for office. If the candidates take all of the exemptions and deductions that they are entitled to; Fine. But if they resort to major tax avoidance schemes, hiring expensive tax professional, just to avoid paying...and this is a Zero sum game...then other, presumably less able to afford individuals, will have to make up the shortfall. We can argue as to whether taxes should be raised or lowered; or whether services should be increased or decreased. But Government must be supported by those who can most afford to do it. Not those that have the least ability to avoid doing it. At some point, Tax Avoidance issues should become an issue in this and many other contests. It is Not what is legal that really matters; it is what is morally right.

The choice has always been between 'the lesser of two evils'. No difference now or in the foreseeable future.

Let their own words be the guide
Robomney at it's finest:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWDJEc92d38

but in actuality, it's how they ACTUALLY GOVERN that people should tune into. I love how both major parties walk around providing ear candy for the populace as they daily rape us left and right. Most love the eargasms, but they never see the evident rape. They always awaken with that painful, violated feeling, but since the corporate controlled lamestream media doesn't inform them of their true predicament, they simply baa baa everyday. Most people need to be told what to think and believe........the television programming does it job.

The two-party Dictatorship is what we have.......and it's been planned.

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy."

Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

FYI: Quigley was Bill Clinton's mentor and the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR) historian.

Who is the CFR you ask? Perhaps the wife of Mr. Clinton has an answer:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba9wxl1Dmas