There are three things that are true about Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Obama is a mostly black man, Clinton is a white woman, and in dog years McCain is 504 years old. Most of the other "truths" about them bear the political face of manipulative deceit. This manicured visage does not accurately portray true intention, experience or morality, therefore no matter whom you vote for, what you see is not what you get.

There are multitudes of jokes about how politicians, snakes and lawyers distort the truth in order to achieve what they want. With poker faces and forked tongues, politicians unabashedly manipulate facts to further their own agendas. When the lies surface, politicians obfuscate until the truth is buried under the verbiage rubble of conservative and liberal warfare.

If honesty were the policy that garnered votes, Obama could remain committed to his long-standing alliance with the likes of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger instead of hypocritically withdrawing from the Trinity United Church of Christ after more than two decades of loyalty. He would not have to deny his support of black liberation theology and could identify himself as the "black power" president. Of course, if he did so, he could not lay claim to the title the "great uniter."

According to James Cone, an influential mentor of the Rev. Wright, "There is no use for a God who loves white oppressors the same as oppressed blacks. ... What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any means at their disposal."

Logic dictates that Obama was influenced by this message in his church. The assumption can be made that Obama expects black people to vote for him in order to gain ground against white oppressors. To admit this publicly would be political suicide. Instead he waters down his life so that he is no longer too white, or too black, to fit the generic mold that sits so comfortably with his supporters. As a talented orator, he mesmerizes people with beautifully phrased platitudes and his Martin Luther King-esque delivery and yet I wonder if his "changes" are ones he can implement or if they are just a load of pie in the sky. I'm thinking pie.

If Clinton had admitted during the primaries that she expected women to vote for her because they are angry about lower pay, condescending pats on the rear end and the stigma attached to the title "housewife," she would have received a lot of flak about girl power. Thus, she appeared to disavow the whole "you go, girl" shtick, slugged whisky like a man, invented snipers and wore bulletproof lipstick except when it served her purpose to show her softer side.

McCain can't tout the fact that during his run for the big house he has a competitive edge because his opponents are a woman and a black, but I imagine he is quite pleased and feeling confident of a win. However, going up against a black man and a hardheaded woman on the same ticket might deflate his balloon a bit.

There are men who would not have voted for Clinton just because she is a woman and it "ain't gonna happen." There are whites who won't vote for Obama just because he is black and those ignoramuses will use the N-word over the dinner table. There are blacks who won't vote for anything white because they blame whites for their own circumstances, and there are young people who won't vote for McCain because although he is a tough nut, he's also an old fart.

Rather than remain true to their beliefs, warts and all, the candidates are compelled to homogenize themselves. Like chameleons, they adjust their focus and rhetoric so that they are always sailing with the political wind but never against it.

In a perfect world candidates could state exactly what they intend to do in office, what their religious and moral beliefs are and why they want to wield the highest political power in the land. Perhaps then, we could elect leaders who would lead the country in the direction the majority wish to go based upon their talents and commitments, not their image.

Instead, we will elect a president who will be reviled and ridiculed by at least half the country if he cannot live up to his "I'll say anything you want to hear" campaign rhetoric. Those voters who played lemming to the chameleon will have willingly participated in a national bamboozlement scheme and until we hold candidates accountable, America deserves what it gets.