The presidential campaign of 2008 may represent some kind of the high-water mark of this post-ironic age in which we live. Look at where we have found ourselves: After seven roller-coaster years of George W. Bush, the country is forced to roll the dice on a completely new game: a woman, a black man, a Mormon, or someone so old that it'd almost be like he stepped off of Mt. Rushmore into the job rather than the other way around. You’d think we’d be in the mood to dial back to a safer choice.

Not an option apparently.

After the many months of prognoses and analyses, after the handicapping and speculations and the polls within the margin of error, Iowa, with its actual voters and actual voting, seems to have focused the attention of the presidential campaigns. And, we now know, the crucial issue facing this war-weary, economically skittish country is change.

The need for change has become the mantra of the political season. On both sides of the nominating process the amount of change promised may be enough to completely remake the entire future of humankind.