This is a posting of the past week’s political doings in which I actually defend both Barack Obama and John McCain and I disclose why the race is so tight and who Obama picks.

In a past posting I describe this time in the presidential race as the Silly Season. It’s in full swing now. It will get worse as candidates, their campaigns, and the media try to compete with the Olympics.

The two biggest episodes of silliness were McCain’s erectile dysfunction moment and the reaction to Obama’s overseas trip.

McCain was asked why erectile dysfunction pills are covered by health insurance when birth control is not. McCain stammered and looked like a deer in the headlights. The video made him look stupid, but in reality it was the reporter who should have been embarrassed.

FactCheck.Org explains it in detail here.  Clearly, the reporter was misinformed. A report from 2002 shows that 86-percent of insurance plans covered female contraceptives; only 2-percent didn’t.

In fact, we should give kudos to McCain for not saying anything. He could have thrown in a cheap funny line. He didn’t. He said nothing because it wasn’t an issue. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood is using the issue in an ad.

Johnny Mac is not off the hook here, though. His campaign has had plenty of ad mistakes, too.

For instance, a McCain spot chided Obama for cancelling a visit to wounded troops. FactCheck.Org explains this one, too.

The whole Obama trip was an exercise of the media and the entertainers (better known as cable and talk radio commentators) flopping all over themselves.

Even one of my favorites, David Brooks, criticized Obama’s speech as too lofty and not enough policy substance compared to past Berlin speeches. He wrote:

When John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan went to Berlin, their rhetoric soared, but their optimism was grounded in the reality of politics, conflict and hard choices. Kennedy didn’t dream of the universal brotherhood of man. He drew lines that reflected hard realities: “There are some who say, in Europe and elsewhere, we can work with the Communists. Let them come to Berlin.” Reagan didn’t call for a kumbaya moment. He cited tough policies that sparked harsh political disagreements — the deployment of U.S. missiles in response to the Soviet SS-20s — but still worked.

I’m not doubting Brooks’ facts. But he misses some key points.

First, Obama is not president yet. Kennedy and Reagan were in office when they gave those speeches. Sure, it seems like Obama has been anointed thanks to the media coverage, but he is still a candidate and he would have looked too presumptive if he had declared specific policy dictates.

It’s the same acknowledgement we gave Mitt Romney during his “religion speech” which failed drastically compared to JFK’s. Romney was only a candidate running for the GOP nomination at the time; he was not anywhere near the presidency. As a result, he didn’t play to America’s sense of religious freedom; he played to the Christian Right and their myopic and, at times, stifling methods. Romney was more concerned about separating Americans into believers and non-believers rather than uniting us.

That leads to a second point. The Obama speech answered the needs of Europeans who are wary of George Bush’s America that seems to divide the world into those who are with us or against us. Europeans don’t want another American politician dictating to them. They want to see if America will work with Europe. Let’s be clear here. We need the rest of the world to like our government again. Obama succeeded.

And third, the GOP has only itself to blame for this trip and the German speech. They criticized Obama for not having enough foreign policy experience. Well, he might have proved them wrong. I’m not saying his visit is any indication that he will be the salvation of the world or that his lack of experience shouldn’t be questioned. But clearly, Obama has hit the right chord with the rest of the world, too.

So, why isn’t Obama running away in the polls? The answer is Hillary. The anger from Hillary supporters has kept the race close. When I hear and examine the reasons for Hillary-folk siding with McCain, it simply boils down to Barack is not Hillary.

Frankly, that will come to an end soon. Like a jilted girlfriend, she and her supporters will get over it and make friends. They’re going to see what the rest of the country wants: the opposite of George W. Bush. McCain, like it or not Republicans, is more W. than Obama is.

We can decipher all the political science reasons that give us a president. But clearly the reasons are much simpler surface issues such as he’s not the last guy. Bill Clinton was more vigorous than G.H.W. Bush who was tired and threw-up fainting on the Japanese PM. Our current Bush won enough votes from people who wanted a chance from Clinton Gore. Go back 30 years and we see that Jimmy Carter was a reaction to the Nixon years.

I’m not certain that Obama will pick Hillary as a running mate. If he did, the race is over. But he made some shrewd comments in his Meet the Press one-on-one with Tom Brokaw. He said he is looking for the right person to help govern, not to win. Sure, that might be empty rhetoric, but it also gives him a presidential tone. Furthermore, if he picks Hillary then she is chosen not as an electoral factor, but as a partner in government.

As a result, I am not certain he won’t pick her. Clearly he needs her supporters. And more than anything he needs Bill on the stump for him. If I had to bet, I say he picks her – and him.

If he does pick her and as long as he continues to sidestep the silly season, then Obama becomes our next president. But remember, we still have more than three months and that’s a long time.

---