I can't understand why anyone would want to run for president. Who in their right mind would willingly open himself up to the kind of scrutiny and criticism that a person has to endure just to compete for what is probably the most difficult, stressful job in the world?

   Obviously some people do covet the position badly enough to try to run that bruising gauntlet because every four years a number of high-profile politicians throw their hats in the ring. I guess we should be grateful that is the case, but it's painful just to watch the process chew people up and spit them out sometimes.

   You have to wonder if Barack Obama has started to have any second thoughts yet regarding his decision to enter the 2008 race. The media's love affair with the Democratic wonder boy experienced some turbulence this week when his acknowledged drug use in his younger days became fodder for his opponents both inside and outside of his party.

   Apparently he published a book years ago, long before he entered politics, in which he acknowledged using illegal drugs when he was in high school and college. No doubt Hillary's army and Republican candidates who were waiting for the Golden Boy's halo to slip danced a little jig when this juicy bone became available to wave under the noses of their attack dogs.

   C'mon guys. You're going to have to do better than that. America, elect a president who is a former drug user? Could such a thing actually happen? Well, let's see.

   Candidate Bill Clinton, did you ever use drugs? "I experimented with marijuana a time or two, and I didn't like it. I didn't inhale." Help yourself to two terms, sir.

   Candidate George W. Bush, how do you respond to allegations from people who knew you during your youthful rebellious period who claim that you not only drank to excess back then (which you admit) but also that you used cocaine? "When I was young and irresponsible, I was young and irresponsible." Hey, that non-answer was an even more weasel-y response to the drug question than Slick Willie came up with. Ah, what the heck, you look like a two-termer as well.

   And now people actually want to suggest that a man might not be fit to be president because he used drugs in his distant past? Are you kidding me? That would be like saying that we can overlook past drug use, but we just don't have the stomach for unflinching honesty. If that is the case we might as well change the job title from president to weasel-in-chief.

   Don't get me wrong, I'm not endorsing Barack Obama. I don't know enough about any of the candidates yet to say who I might or might not vote for. And if Obama is (as I fear) just another big government liberal with a lot of charisma he won't get my vote.

   But I certainly won't rule out voting for a candidate who has made mistakes and is willing to own up to them. I don't expect any candidate to have lived a perfect life, but it would be a refreshing change if more of them just admitted their mistakes and then got on with their business.

   I know, I know, that's not the way the game is played. In politics, any past indiscretion by a candidate is used as fodder by his opposition to paint him as a degenerate who is unfit to walk the streets, much less hold a position of public trust. So you admit to nothing that can't be conclusively proven and equivocate wherever possible.

   That's the way you win elections these days. But that doesn't make it right.