You don’t have to go far into the reality of the GOP Debates (or Democratic Party debates/press coverage) to recognize this is more about the candy-date than the issues or the people. A candy-date is similar to the eye-candy you strapped to your arm to impress the people at the Prom as you walked through the door. He or she may have no more substance than cotton candy but they looked good didn’t they

Last night’s GOP Candidate “debate” was more a tennis match on the respective accomplishments of two Ken dolls trying to romance Barbie (as a metaphor for the American people). They slammed the ball back and forth, looking to score a point while trying to pass the “love” onto the other guy. The media’s been gushing over the front-runners, Romney and Perry, as though they’re the only ones in the race.

They’re not. But the camera tells more about the construct of this “campain” (intentional sic) than words describe. The issues are attacked from behind a barrier of boiler plate statements and occasional witticisms to lighten the load of watching this drivel.

Everybody on the dais wore suits cost more than the average American earned last month. The Cosmetologists of the region made a ton on hair, make-up and nails. From the way some danced with the press so much it might indicate a bad pedicure one or another got out of the deal.

It’s aggravating to know so many people have ego structures leading them to believe he (or she) alone can control the fortunes of 310 million people. This is especially true when you realize the questions are the same, the answers are repetitive and the actors in no way approach award winning performances. The only thing interesting is the manner they show their lubricity, their oiliness and slick movements from morally upright and mindful of the issues to making the other candy-date (and his or her record) the issue.

While watching “debates” such as these we come to appreciate Democrats. They have one candy-date and it would show dysfunction to change dates while already at the Prom. They’ve got an ugly date but the Prom can last just so long and “the party’s over”. So they suffer and smile woodenly as they put their real feelings on the back burner until they know how the evening will work out.

They’ve got their candy-date and now know he’s all fluff, fluster and flimflam. He dresses well and has acceptable manners. But as far as being an engaging and interesting date in his own right, his lack of depth indicates he’s as shallow as a flattened teaspoon.

But the GOP has no greater claim to clarity in their purpose or the direction of their rhetoric. See paragraph # 5 above. The lack of imagination is covered over by the press with statements like: “they get to fine tune their message”, “they have a chance to hone the edge of their arguments” and such other tripe. The fact remains it’s the same answers to the same questions repackaged, rephrased and regurgitated with a regularity highlighting its redundancy.

If Justice is blind, she’s still perceptive as she feels the weight shift on the scales she holds. Things should be out of balance so the question can be argued and answers found through inspection. What causes the imbalance? What makes the weight shift? Is the weight shift for the positive or the negative benefit of the party before the bar? What ULTIMATE effect will the weight shift have on ALL respondents in the case at hand? What we’re really getting is more illusionary than substantial. One ideology matches the other as insipid if they can’t work together for the common good of the common people.

What we see in this campain (sic) is the development of artifice, the edifice or front put on this structure we’re calling a candy-date. It’s a construct of duplicity and posturing assuring the substance of what’s beneath that edifice is ultimately unknown until it’s too late to change the choices made.

In this we ask: how is a GOP candy-date better than the Democratic Party candy-date?

Beats me.

Thanks for listening.