No doubt Palin "exceeded expectations" in the debate last night, but her expectations were that she could walk out and stand at the podium. Beyond that, there wasn't much for Palin in the way of expectations. And, of all nights to exceed expectations, she did it on a night when the good Joe Biden showed up and not the bad one. They were like the flippers on a pin ball machine and if the steel pinball is the campaign, they both worked to flip it back up to their superiors, Obama and McCain.

The one thing I didn't care for about Palin's presentation was her winks. She winked at least 3 times when she was saying something kinda cutesy. In a situation like that a wink means one of two things - either that you are kidding or you are flirting or enticing. I think her use of the wink was the latter and not the former. And, considering that it appears that McCain picked her as a long shot to appeal to Sen. Clinton's supporters strictly because she is female, is it a proper use of sex for Palin to be flirting with the public to get their attention? Is this what Clinton's campaign symbolized? Absolutely not.

All the presidential polls, including the Republican ones, like Rasmussen, show Obama ahead at this point. That means we're going to be seeing a lot of Rev. Wright in these weeks to come. I'm sure that will bring on the ads showing McCain kissing Bush, or whatever he is doing to him. Agreeing with him, that's for sure, at least for the most part.

Yes, it is going to be nasty. And who knows what we will see. Let's hope it isn't too bad. But better prepare for the worst. I mean, if you could have believed that the least popular administration in the history of country could have blackmailed a Democratic congress into voting into this big wall street bailout a few weeks before the election then one might have been tempted to offer you a sale on the Brooklyn bridge. But here we are, signed, sealed and delivered. So for those that think there is a huge difference between the major parties, forget that. But, there is a difference.

Let's hear the voice of the alternative party candidates. We have some experienced and really credible candidates from the alternative parties, and why in the hell can't the system sponsor one nationally televised debate featuring all of them? Are we a true democracy or just a sham democracy? I mean, come on, the ideas we are getting from the "major" parties are pretty lame. And look where they have gotten us. So why not open up the discussion. Wouldn't that be in the national interest?