The German media is getting restless. With just three and a half weeks until the general elections, the only campaign theme that seems to regularly make the front pages is the fact that there is no campaign theme -- excepting, of course, the myriad discussions, as endless as they are pointless, about the possible make up of Germany's next governing coalition. After all, from the moment Chancellor Gerhard Schröder announced his plan to hold snap elections, it has been clear that his chances of actually winning the vote are slim at best. But never ones to give up, German journalists have been doing whatever they can to make it seem like this campaign, pitting Schröder against Angela Merkel, is actually a contest.

In light of such a bland campaign, this week's news is -- for the media at least -- heaven sent. First of all, floods in southern Germany. It was, you'll recall, floods in eastern Germany in 2002 that helped hand Schröder an unlikely re-election in that vote. And secondly, there is the somewhat irrelevant tidbit of news that Schröder has apparently been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize by virtue of his stubborn opposition to the Iraq War.

Many of the commentaries on the nomination are decidedly tongue-in-cheek and that from the Financial Times Deutschland is no different. The short piece begins with the statement that "everything has already been said in this campaign" and points out that the lack of issues is particularly dangerous for Schröder as his party is far behind in the opinion polls. So, the piece continues, with no concrete issues to discuss, why not talk about Schröder's peace prize nomination? The paper's conclusion? While Schröder does receive a certain amount of kudos for standing pat on his Iraq refusal, he has done little else in the name of peace. "And that is a bit of a problem -- even those who want to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature need to have written a book first."

Germany's other financial daily, Handelsblatt, notes the sudden similarities with the last campaign in 2002, which saw Schröder come from behind against his competitor Edmund Stoiber of Bavaria by virtue of massive floods and his politicization of his anti-Iraq war position. Now, flooding has hit southern Germany and the Iraq war is also being revived in the form of the Nobel nomination. This time though it won't help, the paper writes. After all, Colin Powell is also a nominee, "the US Secretary of State who campaigned before the UN for an invasion of Iraq with a completely fabricated multi-media presentation. What would come of Schröder's sympathy points if he had to share the prize with Powell?"

The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung is likewise fed up with the current campaign, but instead of talking about the Nobel Prize nomination, it laments the lack of substance in the current campaign. "Is this campaign really unusually short?" the piece asks in the first sentence. "Or is it the longest we have ever seen. Those who don't know the difference between perceived and actual time should observe the leaders of Germany's political parties as they look for compelling and serious campaign topics."

Finally, the center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung attempts an analysis as to why fully half of Germany's voters still say they don't know for whom they are going to vote. It's not, the paper argues, because they are busy carefully weighing the advantages and disadvantages of the competing parties. Rather, it's because "their expectations and their faith in the candidates' abilities to make needed changes is slight." The problem, the paper writes, is that voters like Gerhard Schröder as a leader, they just don't like his party. On the other hand, they would rather have the Christian Democrats leading the country, but they don't like CDU candidate Angela Merkel. "The Stones song "Angie," which is played during Angela Merkel's campaign appearances, fits her about as well as a bottle of Chateau Margaux goes with a white sausage."

But it's not just the coming elections that have German commentators a twitter. Always up for a chance to bash the United States, they jump on the news that seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong may have doped during his 1999 Tour victory. According to the Tuesday issue of the French sports daily L'Equipe a new test of Armstrong's urine samples from that year shows the presence of the performance enhancing drug EPO. A no no. Armstrong is denying the claims, but given that the Texan has long made a habit out of thrashing Germany's favorite cycling son Jan Ulrich in the French Alps, it is hardly surprising that German commentators are not in a mood for forgiveness.

The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung publishes its commentary below the fold on the front page and writes, "the Tour-victor can flip and flop as he likes, but the accusations against him were never this solid." It is hardly a surprise, the paper continues. Bike racing has long been known as a sport plagued by doping -- "the avant-garde of medicine abuse sit on cycles." Plus, Armstrong himself has long been under suspicion for his association with "doping doctor" Michele Ferrari. It is unfortunate, the commentator writes, that there is little in the way of legal action to be taken. And that such unmaskings take place so seldom.