Presidential debates a misnomer

Democratic and Republican presidential candidates recently held the first round of their respective ?debates.? Ordinary Americans stayed away in droves. We did so, wisely, for two good reasons.

First, the 2008 presidential primaries are at least eight or nine months away. Most of us know little and care less about the current cavalcade of candidates for president.?We?re way too busy trying to make a living while coping with high taxes, high gasoline prices, high health care costs, higher costs for higher education, the rising cost of groceries, and the erosion of wages for hard-working Americans.

We?re also concerned about the adverse effects of the out-sourcing of American jobs and the specter of illegal immigration.

In short, our primary focus is on ?pocketbook? issues.?They hit us where we live and affect the quality of our lives.?Ask us about the ?war on terror? and we?re all for it. Ask us about the war in Iraq and we?re not so sure.??Support our troops ? Bring them home!? is the banner and bumper sticker mantra lately. Simplistic, but seductively succinct, it captures the essence of our mixed emotions on the war in Iraq.

Meanwhile, dozens of potential presidents make their media rounds, well-coiffed and well-clad, basking in their not-so-fleeting fame.?Most of them even deign to debate, as long as it serves their purpose.?Therein lies the second reason for our collective indifference.

These so-called debates are major misnomers. Traditional public political debates, as in Lincoln-Douglas, Kennedy-Nixon, Bush-Gore, and even Bush-Kerry, pit two or more protagonists against each other in a forum that allows the public to determine the credibility of the candidates.?

So far, nothing even remotely close to a debate has happened.?Instead, those of us who have bothered to notice have witnessed what amounts to parallel press conferences, simple-minded sound bites, titillating tidbits and gentle jousting. Long on partisan rhetoric, but short on real substance, these dismal displays are grist for the media mill, but gruel for the rest of us.

Expecting the nature of these debates to improve may be the triumph of hope over experience. Presidential candidates want maximum exposure with minimum risk.? Our 24/7 media outlets fuel the candidates? delusions of grandeur while filling their own agendas. Both mistake their ?hot-button? issues as being the ones that should concern us. When we ignore their antics, they call us ?apathetic.?

The problem with fixating on hot-button issues ? like abortion, gay marriage and gun control ??is they shed more heat than light on the topic. They polarize us.

Politicians use them to pander to our emotions. Artful dodgers seize upon them as easy alternatives to tackling the tough issues that actually affect most Americans.

Maybe the best we can hope for in these marathon media events is that they will thin the herd and finally produce some credible candidates who welcome the challenges of discussing and yes, even debating the issues that really matter to most of us.?If so, then they may finally earn our interest and attention.

Thomas B. Vaughn is an instructor at Motlow College and co-host of the radio show ?Viewpoints,? which airs on WCPI 91.3 FM.