I will be the first to admit that I'm a political mope

My father was one of those guys who knew every senator and representative, canvassed for his local favorites, and treated every election, from the local alderman to the presidential race, like a blood sport. His was a Chicago streetwise political interest, one based on the old-school adage of you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours, and if you help elect the alderman, you'll always get your street plowed.

I've fallen about as far from that tree as an apple can without breaking all the laws of physics.

My idea of political involvement is the faint nostalgia I feel stirring when I find my old Mondale/Ferraro and Dukakis/Betnsen  buttons on the bottom of my desk drawer. I'm one of those uninformed philistines who ticks down the endless list of judges on the ballot and votes for whoever has the coolest names -- although lately I've taken to simply voting against the incumbent.

Maybe it's because I have a history of backing losers (except for the times I voted Republican -- my bad, but it WASN'T W either time -- ) which has soured me on the process. (Besides, we're not really electing anyone, the Electoral College is -- but that's another rant). I'm so bitter about the two-party system that last election I voted the Green ticket, and have voted Libertarian in the past, too.

I find it scary listening to pieces like the recent interview on NPR of two former Clinton aides (interracial, married), who felt they were facing a major life crisis because one of them was backing Hillary, the other Obama. Listening to them rhapsodize about their chosen candidates was like listening to some wild-eyed evangelical Christian who has just seen the light. I found it depressing that anyone could get that excited about something as venal as someone you don't know who is running for political office. I mean, it's not like a Bears/Packers marriage, or something.

I will admit I got faintly excited earlier on in this seemingly endless presidential campaign about Ron Paul. Aside from his stance on abortion, he pushes all my buttons -- eliminating income tax, the Federal Reserve and pretty much doing away with all unnecessary government -- plus he wants to legalize pot! He's quirky and popular with Generation Z, or whatever they're calling themselves. What's not to like? Well, besides the fact that he has a snowball's chance in hell, that is.

Now that the departures of Guiliani and Edwards have left the field less cluttered, it's time to concentrate on who the hell to vote for.

In spite of the nightmarish W legacy, I'm not completely opposed to voting Republican -- not that party affiliations count for much anymore. Look at John McCain, who takes the traditional GOP stance on the military and abortion, but who waxes downright Greenish on global warming, God bless him. Unlike Huckabee and Romney, he doesn't scare the hell out of me; his military record at least proves that he can walk the talk.

Still, although having a nice white-haired father figure as President may be nice in a nostalgic, milk-and-cookies way, I don't really think it's what we need anymore. Which leaves us with Hill and Barack.

And I'm not one of those voters who will select them on their performance, American Idol-style. I'm old enough to remember when the televised presidential debates were the be-all and end-all of discourse. Admittedly, I am a political mope, remember -- but this time around I haven't watched any of the debates on TV. Instead, I've relied on position updates and voting record tracking from Web sites like votesmart.org and factcheck.org.

So who will it be -- Hillary or Obama?

The jury is still out -- stay tuned.