There are, of course, real and defining differences between the two Democrat and the Republican candidates. On Iraq, Clinton would get out soon and Obama sooner, while McCain would stay President Bush’s course: 100 years if necessary to win undefined victory. Obama’s world-view is less military-minded than Clinton’s and McCain’s. In terms of judicial appointments, McCain is pledged to continue the Bush legacy of naming right-wing reactionaries; Obama and Clinton will make liberal appointments. When it comes to the economy, McCain is a chicken hawk, propounding a trailer-park version of Reaganomics. In this regard, Obama and Clinton are traditional Democrats, unafraid — by the standards of the day — of government activism and intervention.

If McCain is unaware of what it costs poor, working-class, and middle-class Americans to merely survive, to struggle, or to live, then Obama and Clinton are unable to convincingly explain how they will pay for the admittedly admirable and even necessary programs they propose, such as green-collar jobs and universal health care.

The almost $10 trillion in national debt that the next president will inherit from Bush brings with it a sobering reality that is as relentless as the international changes America can not control. It is time that at least one of the candidates confronts it.