Change of Pace

I saw a bumpersticker the other day which read, "Somebody else for president."

Yeah. That's where I am.

Perhaps because I still sport the battle scars - courtesty of a "together we can" pie-in-the-sky politician who, with a straight face, once "lead" the Mass Teacher's Association into endorsing a trio of Bay State casinos - I'm just a little bit jaded on 'change'.

So I found myself hoping the Veepstakes would show me something new, though the formula was clear at the get-go: McCain needed a youthful counterpart while Obama had to shore up a shallow levy of experience.

Still, I was convinced Obama would pull a surprise candidate out of his hat. And so when he went ahead and chose Biden, my first thought was, what? - he couldn't find a woman, in the entire Democratic party - with experience?

I mean, this year an awful lot of people demonstrated, with their votes, that they felt it was time for a woman in the White House. So, even if he didn't want to lock hands with Hilary for the long haul, why couldn't Obama have looked beyond the usual suspects? Where was the 'change'?

Had he chosen an experienced, qualified woman for VP, I'll admit, I'd be a lot less ambivalent about my vote. Obama gets a lot of points for 'inspiring' people. But I'm not one of them.

Together we can disappoint.
Together we can underwhelm.

As for McCain, who did make a surprising choice, that choice was puzzling. Palin wasn't going to sway too many Hilary Democrats over to his side. But for a party not known for 'change', he did something my own party failed to do - he paid attention to the message - and chose a woman as a running mate.

And not just some hairdo in a pantsuit. A gun-toting no-nonsense multi-tasking caribou-stalking uber mom. Who, with babe in arms, prepares to send a son off to war while planning a shotgun wedding for a daughter. Youth, strength and change - wrapped in a hard-right, money-where-your-mouth-is package - should appeal to McCain's core constituency - and perhaps a cadre of younger conservative voters. And, unless her America hating past or something weirder comes back to haunt her, I think it was a smart choice.

And so now I'm just confused. The party of 'change' did the expected, while the party of the 'same-old' shook things up. That's not supposed to happen, right?

I don't want to vote Republican. It's not my party. And my values lean left, not right. But I don't want anymore pie in the sky from my party, either. I want pie on my plate.

Change, hope, experience, unity, whatever...

How 'bout - end the war, pay the bills, keep the focus, stop dependence, reform IGRA, go green, get along, do better, help the poor, the sick and the weak, aim higher. Those are some of the things I want whatever the winning ticket is to accomplish.

But of all the things I want, I really want America to stop being the Augusta National of the world when it comes to electing a woman to it's highest office.

Give 50.7% of the country change we can believe in.