Ever stage a dinner where the guests forgot to show? Perhaps that will happen in October. Thankfully, most of the USA may boycott the 2000 presidential debates.

According to A. C. Nielsen, the lowest-rated audience in the history of TV Presidential debates tuned in four years ago. Bad? I applaud. The not-so-secret secret is: Debates are the most insipid way to possibly pick a President.

Let's take a trip down memory lane. The first TV debate was 1960. What do we remember? Not Nixon and Kennedy's substance, and intellect. Rather, how JFK looked like a bronze warrior - and Nixon seemed ill, ill at ease, and needed a shave.

Next, 1976. We remember Gerald Ford stating that the Soviets didn't rule Eastern Europe. 1980. Carter turning to daughter Amy for nuclear arms advice, and Reagan saying, "There you go again."

Since '84, memory links Reagan dismissing age, Dukakis downplaying a question on rape, and Bush looking at his watch. Interesting? Possibly. Indelible? Clearly. Yet if irrelevance is an art form, Presidential debates are the Rembrandt of our age.

Too often, TV debates star attributes which don't matter in a President. Glibness, surface charm, the ability to turn political tables on your rival. They don't measure quality which do matter - honest, resilience, scholarship, depth. What are we holding here - an election, or vaudeville on parade?

Go back to 1960. Since then, what an opportunity missed. On tape, Nixon and Kennedy still impress a viewer. Men of heft and history, preferring fact and policy to a one-line phrase. At the time, TV said future debates would climb a mountain. Instead, they've plunged off a cliff. Worse, the most vacuous is still to come.

Some decry the falling audience. Perhaps more would watch if the candidates were severely questioned by an objective panel; if extended follow-up was allowed; and if the in-person audience of lackies was banished from the hall. Sadly, before that happens George Steinbrenner will be Queen of the May.

Here's what I propose. Before voting, read about the candidates, compare their policy to rhetoric, decide who's lying and who's speaking on the square. Affirm knowledge - eschewing heat for light. Do that, and you can set the table and chill the wine. Your dinner, unlike too many TV debates', will be a dinner not to miss.

Express your opinion on this topic to Curt or to the Commission on Presidential Debates.