Out of all the millions of words written and spoken about the dozens of presidential candidates, only these made by a CNN analyst after one of the gazillion debates is spot on: "What strikes me is the lack of sincere enthusiasm for any of the candidates."
After the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary what remains clear is the candidates are not trustworthy.
Whichever leading candidate from whatever party tells you that he or she is an agent of change and defender of the American worker and "working families", you're being lied to.
The recently brought-down-to-earth Barack Obama likes to say,
"I'm asking you not just to believe in my ability to bring about real change in Washington…I'm asking you to believe in yours."
In the eyes of this cynical, half-baked Democrat, nothing could be further from the truth.
Only the most politically naïve could buy into Obama's comment or similar ones made by Hillary Clinton.
The question that voters must ask is what specifically do Obama and Clinton propose to change.
On two crucial issues, immigration and jobs, both are on the side of more and fewer (for Americans) respectively.
Despite overwhelming evidence that Americans want to end illegal immigration, reduce legal immigration and deny amnesty for those in the country illegally, Obama and Clinton are in favor of all three.
In a not-so-amazing coincidence during 2007, Obama and Clinton each cast seven pro-amnesty votes, supported the Dream Act and endorsed Sen. Dianne Feinstein's proposal that a new "orange card" be created that would allow certain aliens to qualify for permanent residency.
In 2006, on six separate Senate floor actions on amendments or bills that would create amnesty, Obama and Clinton voted "yea" for each and every one.
When it comes to importing more foreign workers, Obama and Clinton cast eleven votes during 2006-2007 for measures that either would have created more permanent and temporary work visas and against a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security verify that a job shortage exists before a visa could be issued.
In January, Obama's office issued a press release that included this statement in reference to non-immigrant work visas:
"We live in a global economy, and I do believe that America will be strengthened if we welcome more immigrants who have mastered science and engineering."
And Clinton has repeatedly called for an expanded H-1B program for more foreign-born workers saying last summer at the Indian Institute of Technology Conference in Santa Clara that they "contribute greatly to our U.S. technology development".
Their protestations aside, as far as jobs and the American worker are concerned, Obama and Clinton are the avowed enemy.
Despite their abysmal records on the two pressing issues of immigration and jobs that are so high on American voter's minds, either could be the next president.
After eight years of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and two years of the worst Democratic leadership in Congressional history, compliments of Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi, America is fed up.
But American disgust doesn't necessarily translate into a win for Obama or Clinton.
Obama's vulnerability was exposed in New Hampshire. And Clinton has been around so long that we've watched her daughter Chelsea grow up from a grade school kid in knickers to being just shy of 30.
What Clinton and Obama should be most fearful of is not a tired Republican retread like John McCain but instead a former Republican (and once a Democrat), New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
The current Independent's candidacy grows more certain the muddier the primary waters become.
Bloomberg, a multi-billionaire, is quietly putting together his staff and waiting in the wings for the right moment to jump into the fray. [NY Mayor Bloomberg Weighs 2008 Run, by Sara Kugler, Associated Press, January 9, 2008]
All Bloomberg has to do is write himself a $1 billion check and he's off to the races.
Joe Guzzardi [email him], an instructor in English at the Lodi Adult School, has been writing a weekly column since 1988. It currently appears in the Lodi News-Sentinel.