I’ve been wondering how the presidential debates and the financial crisis are playing here at home.

As in most areas of the country, national issues often are seen in Monroe County through one set or another of personal filters.

If you’re a card-carrying conservative, you see John McCain, Sarah Palin and Wall Street through one set of glasses, and Barack Obama, Joe Biden and the financial world through another.

That’s why the last two presidential elections were so close. A huge percentage of Americans already have their mind made up - based on liberal/conservative biases. The decision is made by a few in the middle.

As I’ve said before, this election has twisted that equation, at least to a degree. Neither candidate fits the traditional mold. This isn’t John Kerry vs. George Bush.

But people I’ve talked to seem to see the first presidential debate - as well as Katie Couric’s interview of Sarah Palin - through those same sets of glasses.

Republicans think McCain won the debate and that Palin did fine in the interview. Democrats think Obama won the debate and that Palin embarassed herself.

The split isn’t as obvious on the financial crisis. Even conservatives - who supported the deregulation of Wall Street - are willing to be thoughtful about the result. And some are willing to recognize that John McCain was among those who advocated less government control of the financial markets.

Many liberals - while anxious to blame Bush and his friends for the mess - also are conflicted over the potential solutions. They recognize this isn’t a liberal/conservative issue; it’s a national crisis that transcends ideology. They’re just as nervous as conservatives about a government takeover of the financial system.

One thing is clear. No one - Republican or Democrat - wants to give $700 billion of taxpayer money to a bunch of banks who got in trouble because they were greedy.

But at the same time, no one wants the national financial system to crash - if that really could happen.

There could be many silver linings. Once we get past the crisis, we may have a more stable financial system, with an appropriate level of government oversight.

And maybe, just maybe, this crisis helped some people see the presidential race in a different light.

Maybe they’ll throw away at least some of their liberal/conservative biases and evaluate the presidential candidates with an open mind.

At a time when American journalists are challenged by emerging media on one flank and covering a historic presidential race on another, an even tougher challenge has surfaced.

The current financial crisis is among the most difficult issues ever faced by news reporters, and it may be among the most important.

The issues are so complex, few people inside or outside the media truly understand them. And the potential for worldwide harm is frightening.

This isn’t just about some folks who took out adjustable mortgages they really couldn’t afford. Sure, it’s called “the sub-prime mortgage crisis,” but bad mortgages are only one leg of a writhing, squirming octopus that has strangled the world’s banking and investment industry.

I’ve read, listened to or watched numerous explanations of “derivatives.” I understand what they are, but after all the coverage I only have passing familiarity with the dozens, perhaps hundreds, of different ways they are used by investors to hedge their losses or by speculators looking for quick profits.

The fundamental problem, it seems to me, is that every dollar a homeowner puts on the line through a mortage is spun into hundreds of dollars by investors and speculators. So a simple bank foreclosure, while tragic for the homeowner, spirals through the investment world causing many times more damage.

It’s easy to blame greedy speculators. And any government bailout plan that bails them out would be wrong, plain and simple.

But it’s not that simple.

The real villains are the people at the top of government and big business who allowed our financial institutions to reach this point - where unregulated financial transactions - millions of them - could put our nation and world at this kind of risk.

And where has the media been? Unwilling or unable - I suspect the latter - to first understand and then clearly report, what is happening.

Unfortunately, now that the crisis is here, the same challenges exist. It’s a very complicated issue and most of the coverage seems to be focused on the problem and reaction to it - not the cause.

As a journalist and a consumer, I’m rooting for national financial reporters - whether print, radio, television or Internet is their medium - to get to the bottom of what caused this mess and what is needed to fix it.

To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson’s famous quote, I trust the journalists more than I trust the government to get it right. But it’s not going to be easy.

I’m cheering for the folks who are trying to raise money to preserve the land owned by the IHM sisters in Monroe.

Few cities of any size are given an opportunity like this - a beautiful piece of undeveloped property in the middle of the city.  And this property is more than beautiful - it’s also ecologically significant, from its oak savannah to the island in the river.

Future generations would get a lot of benefit from this property - if a way can be found to raise the money to purchase it.

I understand why the Sisters can’t just give it away. It’s their nest egg, the resource they’re counting on to finance their future.

The compromise they’re working on with the Friends of the Academy Preserve makes a lot of sense - a blend of local and state money to save the property from development, which will happen if the sisters are forced to sell it to private interests.

The Friends are trying to raise $750,000 from local contributions as the match to a $2.2 million state grant. That’s a big mountain to climb, but it’s not impossible. There are a lot of generous people and corporations in Monroe County.

City and county governments also should be looking for ways to help. This would be an appropriate use for some tax money, too. The benefit to the entire community would be immeasurable - especially when considered over the decades and centures into the future.

If the Academy Preserve was developed well it could become a jewel in the center of Monroe. Especially when combined with the other potential tourism draws along the River Raisin - the 1812 battlefield, Sterling State Park, the Custer Statue, St. Mary’s Park, a revitalized downtown - it’s a project that is worth the money.

I’m not looking forward to the renewed “culture wars” that Sarah Palin’s nomination seems to have set off.

It’s tough enough to be a journalist - the world is a complex place. It isn’t easy to ask the right questions, sort through a maze of information and put together a clear, crisp story that is fair, honest and accurate.

Add in the cultural biases that are tearing America into two almost equal halves - witness the closeness of the last two presidential elections - and the job becomes even more challenging.

What am I talking about, you ask?

The nomination of Sarah Palin as the Republican candidate for vice president has again pitted the “left-leaning media” against the “conservative right” in an unwinnable Donnybrook.

The social conservative wing of the Republican Party has rallied around Palin, joyously rejoicing in her pro-life, pro-gun values. Any criticism - or even tough questioning - is being labeled as unjustified attacks by the nasty media.

Up to this point, the unusual nature of the two candidates - John McCain’s role as a maverick in his party and Barack Obama’s quick rise from outside his party’s mainstream - have kept the culture wars largely hidden. Every news story wasn’t seen through a left vs. right prism.

Now, I’m afraid it will be impossible to write a news story or produce a TV news spot on Sarah Palin without worrying about whether it will be seen as “left-wing bias” by one side or “too soft because of fear of criticism” by the other side.

There are a lot of unanswered questions about Sarah Palin. And none of them have anything to do with her daughter or husband or former brother-in-law. They have to do with her views on the economy, on Iraq and Afghanistan, on health care and immigration. And with her credentials for making tough decisions when hotspots in the world flare up or when hurricanes strike or flood-waters rise.

Without the culture war stigma, perhaps we could get answers to some of those questions in the next two months.

 But if every question is questioned, if Mrs. Palin becomes more of a lightning rod than a serious candidate, she’ll still be a mystery on Nov. 4.

For another look at Palin and the culture wars: http://editor.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah-palin-wagging-dog-in-dodge-city.html#comment-form

John McCain and Barack Obama have been claiming from the beginning that they would run a different kind of campaign - less partisan, less nasty, less in attack mode.

While there already has been plenty of attacking and more is likely to come, both have shown signs of holding to their word.

McCain’s classy ad congratulating Obama the night he accepted the Democratic nomination was an example.

Obama’s Labor Day speeches in Detroit and Monroe, when he set aside politics in deference to the hurricane hitting New Orleans, is another. Same kudos to McCain for throttling down the Republican convention during the hurricane.

And Obama struck another kinder and gentler note when he declined to discuss Sarah Palin’s daughter’s unwed pregnancy, declaring in no uncertain terms that family are off-limits and that no one from his staff will discuss the subject.

While I’m not so naive to think that attack ads won’t be used this fall, maybe this pair of candidates finally understands that Americans will respond positively to candidates who run clean campaigns.