Does TV decide your vote?

Just ask your friend to name the Republican or Democratic presidential candidates, and I will almost guarantee they will only be able to name the top three or possibly four. That's because that is all they hear on television. Why does television only talk a bout the top three? Because they have raised the most money and, consequently, top the polls. They have more money because our society's big-money contributors support the candidates they think will help them the most.

We have a lot of problems in this country, and it is crucial that we elect a president who can solve them. Everyone has different criteria for selecting a candidate. Many, unfortunately, do not take the matter seriously or base their decision on an obsession or some menial, unimportant factor.

Although Webster defines "broad-minded" as "tolerant of unconventional behavior," I feel it should go further than that. Our president should have a broad knowledge about many things, insight (the ability to see and understand the nature of things), ability to analyze (to examine in detain) and make correct, logical decisions.

My own definition of logic is to determine all the things that can happen and the things that most probably will happen as a result of a decision. In other words, use common sense.

Above all, a president should be flexible, not become obsessed and have the ability to compromise and negotiate an issue.

The thing that concerns me most is the media (mostly television) coverage (or lack of it) of the presidential candidates. I have carefully listened to practically all of the panel debates and tried to fairly evaluate the candidates. Although the debate directors were unbiased, they have tended to give more time to the top three candidates, whom we have heard from for months before and after the debates.

After careful consideration after the debates and based on my criteria, I was most impressed with California Republican congressman Duncan Hunter and New Mexico Democrat governor Bill Richardson. Granted, this is just one man's opinion, and other candidates have merit. But it would be proper if all candidates had equal time.

There are a lot of things besides lapel pins our candidates should be concerned and knowledgeable about:

• The trillion-dollar deficit, for example. How can we pay it back? What will happen if cannot pay it back? Did the Iraq war cause it? And what can Japan and China do if we do not pay our debt?
• The economy. Do we have anything to export to other nations? How should it be changed?
• Inflation. What causes it, and how can we control it?
• The Iraq war. How has it affected our nation, and how can we end it?
• National security. How do we improve our relations with other countries?
• Taxes and subsidies. Do we need tax reform? Should we be giving subsidies to big oil companies and corporations making record profits?
• Global warming. What can we do to help?

These are a few of the things we should hear about from all of our candidates, not just a few of our so-called top candidates.

Jack H. Knowlan Sr. is a Jackson resident.