Last week a large group of church members and I went together to a local assisted living home to sing hymns and happy birthday to our most senior member. Our friend was celebrating her 105th birthday.

The birthday girl was born exactly two months before the Wright brothers made their first airplane flight at Kitty Hawk on Dec. 17, 1903.

Her short term memory sometimes fails her now, but she has vivid memories of things from long ago. For instance, she shared with us that she remembered during the Great Depression riding to church in a wagon with a chicken in a burlap sack laid across her feet to keep them warm in the winter.

I asked my 105-year-old friend if she could remember the first time she voted for president. She could not, but when I asked if she was Republican or Democrat she readily offered, “Republican.”

I did the math and I suppose that if she voted in the first election she was eligible for after women won the right to vote, then the first Republican she must have supported was Calvin Coolidge. The political genius of President Coolidge, Walter Lippmann pointed out in 1926, was his talent for effectively doing nothing.

He commented that: “This active inactivity suits the mood and certain of the needs of the country admirably. It suits all the business interests which want to be let alone…. And it suits all those who have become convinced that government in this country has become dangerously complicated and top-heavy….”

My visit with our congregation’s most senior member got me thinking about all of the reasons that we are calling the current campaign a historic occasion: The first potential African-American president, the first Republican female vice presidential candidate, potentially the oldest person to be elected to a first term.

These things have all given this election cycle a great deal of historic import. There is one thing, though, which trumps them all in my mind; This weekend I read that this is now officially the most expensive election in history.

Based on current spending it is predicted that Obama’s general election advertising campaign will surpass the $188 million Bush spent on his in 2004 campaign early in the coming week. McCain has spent $91 million on advertising.

Just using those two numbers right now the total campaign spending would total $279 million. With that much money you could buy every his-and-hers gift in this year’s Neiman Marcus Christmas catalog 22 ½ times. Here is what the 2008 wish list has to offer:

• A backyard golf course custom-designed by champ Jack Nicklaus — $1 million
• $10 million Kentucky horse farm, complete with a stable of up to 15 thoroughbreds
• Life-size Lego replicas of you and your beloved for $60,000 each
• $250,000 authentic Guinness pub
• $110,000 for a chance to shoot some hoops with the Harlem Globetrotters
• $110,000 fighter motorcycle
• 35-year collection of every 45 RPM record listed on the Billboard Top 100 Rock and Pop charts through the end of 1990 /$275,000
• A Dallas Cowboys end zone in your backyard for $500,000
• Limited-Edition 2009 BMW Individual 7 Series Sedan, $160,000

That is all luxurious. What about something practical? With all of the money spent thus far on this years campaigning, you could send 8,206 students to the University of Missouri for four years, pay for Medicare gap insurance for 46,500 senior citizens, or make a year’s worth of average mortgage payments for 22,595 households in Missouri.

I think this kind of extravagance is sinful given the depressed nature of our economy right now. So, here is the question: Is all of this advertising necessary? Is it the case that whoever can afford to spend the most is virtually assured of victory? Do we need for all of this to change or is it just OK?

By the way, my 105-year-old friend does not think that 72 is too old to be president. She has children older than that.