On CSPAN, i have seen Mr. Kerry address the black caucas, Mr. Cheney eat custard in Wisconsin and Mr. Bush screw up at the Journalists of Color Convention. Barring few exceptions, they were either addressing a handpicked crowd of "true believers" (miners, mill workers, born again christians in swing states, etc.) or, especially in Mr. Bush's case, an often compliant press corps. This, I find highly disturbing and extremely unhealthy, indeed illegitimate, in a democracy. It, in my opinion, has the following repercussion:

The "she-said , he-said" comes in the picture because candidates neither talk face to face nor are asked tough questions. The press reports sound bytes and the readers/viewers *loose track* of what the dis-agreement is all about, indeed where the argument began in the first place. (Main reason why many voters see little or no difference between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush)

Instead (and here is where the media comes in), the media presents spiced-up, juicy, prime-cuts of mudslinging in soap-opera like episodes. Take the popular swift-boat veterans episode, for example (now in its second season). Here, a decorated soldier is being questioned the validity of his awards !! 35 years later ! Even if you disregard the irony of an awol like Mr. Bush questioning Mr. Kerry, the very episode is *insane* and deserves absolutely *no* press coverage. Can any decorated soldier use his miliitary triumphs to stand for President from now on ? ( In a remarkable and unpredictably twisted response, disgraceful excuse-for-a-journalists like Mr. Dan Rather have begun to dig up twice buried dirt on Mr. Bush. )

This reminds me of a sign i saw in a restroom is San Francisco this weekend: "Do not throw the garbage on the floor" - an unusually blunt sign compared to the public politeness I am used to in the US. But, then again, i thought, this is exactly what the US media has been doing to the American voters nowadays. There is so much garbage thrown by the media on the floor that the voters aren't even educated about the real issues. Like America's energy dependence on the middle-east, mounting budget deficit and poor public health-care system. Issues that, i believe, are most important to these voters in the long-run. And issues that they are blissfully unaware of, unless they read political scientists or a few well-heeled columnists like Thomas Friedman.

Its a catch-22, really. Media produces no debate. No debate produces a numbed, confused voting populace. A populace that understands only easily digestable sound bites. So, Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush deliver, yes, easily digestable sound bites. Including:

Mr. Kerry: "scrap NAFTA", "tax outsourcing companies" -- economists would (many in the FT) will attest to the supreme stupidity of such broad and unqualified statements. Yet, the unemployed, numbed in Ohio would find a song they like in such travesty.

Mr. Bush: "saddam gassed his own people. he supported terrorists" -- two sentences with no relation to each other. Indeed, there are more terrorists in Iraq now than there were under Mr. Hussain.