Blitzerkrieg

My mind is made up. I'm voting for Wolf Blitzer for President.

I had been undecided until Sunday night, when I caught him in action as the moderator/host in the second episode of my favorite reality TV show. He won the Democratic presidential debate at St. Anselem hands down. He could be the first bearded president since William Henry Harrison, a man who is in the tradition of Rutherford B. Hayes, James Garfield, U.S. Grant and, of course, Lincoln.

Blitzer showed the qualities we most want in a president. He is articulate, knowledgeable, spoke in sound bites that ended with a period, and most importantly, he looks good on TV. He knows how to wear make up. Unlike front-runner Hillary Clinton. I hadn't seen such a ghastly orange make-up job since visiting Lenin's tomb in Moscow.

Wolf had the most face time on camera. He asked the most provocative questions and knew the answers. He was like a teacher testing students, rapping their knuckles when they occasionally didn't answer the question. He was the one lecturing them in front of the class, "But you said last time ... " citing the evidence.

True, it wasn't much of a debate. More like a high school drama club doing a political version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

Wolf kept throwing off all the other candidates by changing the issues, giving some a chance to speak, but not others. It was somewhat confusing for anybody who wanted to compare the eight other candidates' positions.

It wasn't even a glorified press conference. Only occasionally did Wolf even call on the assembled correspondents who had the thankless task of coming up with the questions the candidates never answer anyway. Not that the pundits were necessary: Wolf had his own stock of questions.

He even introduced hypotheticals ("What would you do if elected president..."), infuriating Sen. Clinton. I was surprised she didn't ask him, if he was so smart, what would he do if he were president. And he would have told her.

It was the Wolf Blitzer show all the way, an expanded version of CNN's Situation Room. He was in control at all times. Decisive. He showed the leadership qualities we want in a chief executive Sunday night.

That's why I'm supporting Wolf Blitzer for President, I think.

In fairness, I should say that all the other candidates on the stage seemed better than President Bush. But that's faint praise.

Some may think that these so-called "debates" are stupid, and a waste of time, the media nattering afterwards annoying and boring. The naysayers think we the people don't care about who says what at this point, especially since everyone knows they are all going to change their minds anyway as the months go by. But these TV events are important for the "undecideds."

I should explain that I am in the segment of the constituency that is still undecided about the coming presidential elections.

We are the Hamlets who pace the ramparts debate after debate trying to decide who to vote for, first in the primaries, then in the election. No matter how many commercials we see -- those hallowed moments of truth that we tell pollsters are the only things we trust -- by the time we go the polls we are still undecided. We the undecideds are pivotal in elections. At least that's what the TV news tells us all the time.

Admittedly, it isn't easy keeping up with the dwarfs who are flip-flopping around on the issues.

That's why it's good that candidates now start campaigning three years in advance. One day we think Hillary is the one, the next day Obama, the third Edwards. And in my case it's the Blitzer, I think.

But I might change my mind after the debate tonight when the Republican Eight perform their act. We the undecideds are looking forward to the Republicans debating against Wolf Blitzer tonight on CNN, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m..

We undecideds want to hear what they all have to say on the issues. Then we will go into the voting booths and decide who will be the next president of the most powerful nation on the earth on the basis of liking the tie the guy wore or whose face looked more honest, and who has had more wives, Giuliani or Romney?