A Few Wishes

I wish conservatives weren’t generally so smug and condescending.  I wish liberals weren’t generally so sanctimonious and self-righteous.

I wish conservatives would realize they don’t corner the market on patriotism.  I wish liberals wouldn’t roll their eyes at people who are proud to fly the flag.

I wish conservatives wouldn’t feel the need to carry a Glock into the grocery store.  I wish liberals would realize that some people just like guns, and that it’s legal to own and use certain kinds of guns, and that it always will and should be—especially when it comes to protection of one’s home and property.  Don’t like guns?  Don’t own one.

I wish liberals would realize lots of people believe in God, and that they’re going to let their beliefs dictate how they vote.  And that that’s okay.  But I wish conservatives would realize that not everybody believes that God should dictate what’s in our constitution, whether it’s gay marriage or abortion.  Don’t like gay marriage?  Don’t marry someone of the same sex.  But don’t “fix” the constitution so that your morals apply to everyone.

I wish there were term limits.  The president has term limits, why not apply limits to other offices?   I used to be against term limits, after all, we have natural term limits in place—they’re called elections.  But if a candidate or party is so powerful that a race is practically guaranteed to be unopposed, something is wrong with the system.  Maybe the limits will encourage the PACs and SuperPACs to spend their money finding and grooming good new candidates instead of spending money on telling everyone how the [insert a party here]’s candidate is really from hell and will ruin everyone’s lives.  Yeah, we’d lose some good public servants because of term limits, but we’ve lost some good presidents due to term limits, too.  Think Reagan or Clinton or maybe Eisenhower wouldn’t have gotten a third term? 

I wish supporters of BOTH parties would stop being offended when the party they don’t support does something they think isn’t right or fair, and then act like their party would NEVER do something like that.

How is ANYTHING that Ann Coulter says NOT considered hate speech?  As far as I’m concerned, she, and the FOXers, along with Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann can go find a remote island somewhere and get stranded there.  And that no news outlets reported on anything that came out of there.

I wish conservatives didn’t want to hoard all the power and money. I wish liberals didn’t want to spread it equally among everyone.

I wish conservatives would realize that you can’t just bomb everyone that disagrees with us, that it makes us seem like a bully on the world stage, and that will just encourage extremist lunatics to try to pick us off in small doses when they can.  I wish liberals would realize it’s okay to bomb the ever-loving shit out of someone if they do something to support/enable someone that’s actively hurting Americans. 

I wish conservatives would realize that if you waterboard someone, they’ll tell you anything to get you to stop, so it doesn’t do much good.  But I wish liberals wouldn’t care, because if one good piece of intelligence prevents some extremist from hijacking the plane my family is on, I’m all for not smashing into the ground at 600 miles per hour instead of going to Disney World.

I wish conservatives wouldn’t assume that liberals were just stupid, and that if they were better informed or more patriotic, they’d be conservatives.  I wish liberals wouldn’t assume that conservatives were just greedy racists, and that if they weren’t rich or wrapped in the flag or the bible, they’d be liberals.

I wish conservatives would realize that global warming is a fact, and that humans likely have something to do with it.  I wish liberals would realize we all don’t want to drive the equivalent of electric golf carts on anywhere but a golf course.

I wish conservatives would realize that for 99% of people, sexual orientation isn’t a choice.  I wish liberals would realize that you’re probably not going to change the minds of people who think homosexuality is gross and/or wrong, and trying to guilt them into changing is stupid and wrong.

I wish I weren't glad that Obama won just so that conservatives could feel the same dread and hate that I felt the night George W. Bush got re-elected. 

I wish partisans would realize that all the good ideas aren’t exclusive to one political party.  I wish people would realize that there’s a time to take a conservative approach to things, and that there’s a time to take a liberal approach to things.  And that those times split right about 50-50. 

I wish people would realize that moderates don’t want compromises that result in nothing.  Moderates want the approach that not one side has all the answers.  And in this country, that seems to be a radical idea.

That's why I consider myself neither a democrat nor a republican, but a Radical Moderate.

The Day After Tomorrow

Whatever happens tomorrow, I’m not going to be happy.  This election cycle seems even more rancorous than the last three (Bush-Gore 2000, Bush-Kerry 2004, and Obama-McCain 2008), and if we were still not a little fragile from the events of 9/11, I think either of the 2004 or the 2008 elections could have created permanent rifts in the country.  Who knows…maybe they have.

So here we are, less than twelve hours until the polls open.  Early voting, of course, has already begun, but the real deal starts tomorrow.  And when the dust settles tomorrow night—if we’re not faced with some sort of Florida 2000 scenario, I’m dreading what lies in front of us, regardless of who wins.

Because we’ll all lose.

If Barack Obama gets re-elected, a great deal of the country, which seems to already hate him, will smugly be thanking liberals for four more years of socialism.  And a great deal of the country will be smugly dismissing conservatives with the election as proof that we don’t want mean, rich white guys as the ruling class anymore.  Of course, there will be a large contingent of people who will have again elected what they perceive as the lesser of two evils—people who will be uneasy having chosen someone who didn’t live up to the promise of four years ago over someone who seems to not care about the half of the country that isn’t going to vote for him.  The devil you know, you know?

And if Mitt Romney gets elected, a great deal of the country will smugly be dismissing everyone who ever even considered voting for Obama as a socialist liberal, unpatriotic and deserving of banishment to the fringes while the adults go back to work, while a great deal of the country will be smugly thanking Rush and Ann and FOX for leading us back to Karl Rove-style douchebaggery.  Of course, there will be a large contingent of people who will have again elected what they perceive as the lesser of two evils—people who will be uneasy having chosen a guy with a weird religion they know nothing about, who flip-flops a lot (but at least is a Republican) over someone who, while under his administration, things got a little better but not as much as he had promised.  This guy has to do better than the last guy, right?

Doesn’t Wednesday sound like fun?

As for me, about twelve hours until the polls open, I’m still undecided.  And by that, I mean I’m undecided about whether I’m even going to vote—for a couple of reasons.  First of all, I live in Illinois, and my vote won’t matter because of the Electoral College.  Obama will win Illinois whether I vote for him or Romney, so what’s one more vote more or less for either guy here?  Second, I’ve sort of come up with a theory—and if everyone subscribed to it, it could lead to real change.  That theory is, if no one votes, neither of the lesser of two evils can take office.  George Carlin had a great observation in one of his acts—and I’m paraphrasing here:  'If you vote, and you elect incompetent, dishonest people and they get into office and screw everything up, YOU caused the problem, YOU voted them in.  I, who stayed home on election day, had NOTHING to do with the mess YOU created.'

Amen, brother. 

I voted for Barack Obama four years ago, and I think he’s done lots of good things.  But while his supporters look at his specific accomplishments, I look at the overall tone of his body of work, and I don’t like how he’s done some of it.  Remember, four years ago, he campaigned on Hope and Change.  I took that to mean a new attitude in America after the divisiveness of the Bush years—a breath of fresh air; a genuine effort to work together with different points of view and come to a consensus on what’s best for America, not just for a political party.   Mission Not Accomplished.  He rammed through health care reform on party lines, he continually blamed his predecessor for the state of things, and he has demonized those fortunate enough to earn a good living.  Sound like Change?  Not so much.

If Barack Obama gets re-elected, I’m afraid of what the next four years will bring.  I think he will view a re-election as a mandate to continue the same kind of divisive campaign against the rich that got him re-elected.  It will be four more years of class warfare.  I’m not going to call it socialism like those on the right will, but class warfare is what it is.  I mean, yeah, generally, I think rich people try to get out of paying taxes and that they’ll screw anyone to hoard an extra dollar, but that’s America.  That’s their right as capitalists.  But how is class warfare a good thing?  How is making them seem like villains going to move the country forward?  It doesn’t solve the fundamental problem that we spend more than we take in—a problem that, despite what the right would have you believe, is NOT limited to Democratic administrations.  Plus, Republicans hate Obama so much, in a second term they will vindictively block anything he wants to do even if it means the country suffers for it, thereby guaranteeing a Republican president in 2016. 

But if Mitt Romney gets elected, I’m equally afraid of what the next four years will bring.  He might improve the economy and create jobs, though I think a president’s influence on the economy doesn’t really amount to much.  But you heard what he said in his famous 47% remarks (which he has since stepped back from, ever so slightly—not that I buy this supposed remorse).  He basically has no respect for half the country.  How can we have a leader like that?  And how can we elect a leader whose morals might dictate that certain kinds of discrimination are just fine?  Is it better to have an improving economy but diminished civil and human rights?  If so, at best, it makes it the 1950’s again.  At worst, it makes us China.

What it boils down to is that we have a president who, in my view, who hasn’t lived up to his promise running against a challenger who doesn’t deserve the office, with the losing side hell-bent on screwing the winning side--and the American people along with it.  My advice is to buy plenty of stock in K-Y.

Doesn’t Wednesday sound like fun?

A Speech You Will Never Hear

Here is the speech Mitt Romney could give that would win him the White House.  Trouble is, we'll never hear it.

"My fellow Americans:

In a political campaign, it’s no secret there’s lots of strategizing, particularly when it comes to communications.  You have to be popular to win, and so candidates tend to lean toward popular ideas when campaigning.  In other words, you promise things to get votes.  That’s as old as politics itself.

But you also have to balance those populist messages with the hardliners in your party who want nothing to do with not only opposition ideas, but even centrist ideas as well.  It’s their way or the highway.  And if you don’t kowtow to them, you don’t get their support, you don’t get their money, and you don’t win the election.

In my campaign in particular, it’s been difficult trying to woo independents in the center who voted for President Obama’s message of hope and change four years ago, while trying to appease those party hardliners with the money and influence.

And it hasn’t really worked.  So it’s time to change tactics.  Not that I was dishonest before, but, now, it’s time to be honest—not only to you, the voter, but to myself as well.  I’m going to campaign on what I believe in, results be damned.  I’m behind in the polls anyway, if you believe them, with almost no chance to win, so it’s time to bring REAL change to our politics.

During this campaign, one word has dogged me in particular.  It’s flat-out vilified me, in some people’s eyes.  That word isn’t “Mormon.”  It’s “rich.”

He’s rich, so he must be bad.  He must be greedy.  He must want not only his own fortune, but everyone else’s money, too.  So I better not vote for him.

Well, let’s talk about that word, rich.

Am I rich?  Yes, I’m rich.  But here’s my question:  so what?   Isn’t that the American dream?  Why am I being demonized because I have a lot of money?  President Obama has a lot of money.  President Bush and his father before him had lots of money.  President Clinton had a lot of money.   It’s nothing new to have a wealthy man in office.

Why, all of a sudden, is it bad to have one now?

Sure, I got some help from my dad, but lots of people get help from their parents when they first start out.  Maybe they help out with your first car or your first house.  My father helped out with my first company.  It’s a matter of scale.  What I did from there was my own doing.  I worked my tail off my whole adult life to take what my father gave me and build upon it.  The same way that someone takes that first house their parents helped them buy, pays it off, or most of it off, and then buys a nicer, newer house.  Or a nicer, newer car.  There’s nothing wrong with that.  When did it become a bad thing to aspire, and to achieve?

President Obama has built his campaign—has built his whole presidency—on class warfare.  “Get the rich to pay their fair share,” he says, and crowds go nuts.

“If Mitt Romney gets elected,” he continues, “the rich will get richer and you’ll end up supporting their lavish lifestyles.”  Rich, rich, rich.  Rich is bad.

Well, here’s a question for you:  Doesn’t everyone want to be rich?  I would say that 99% of Americans—not that 47% I stupidly and incorrectly bad-mouthed to impress a few hardliners—want to be rich.  And that’s probably an underestimate.  There’s nothing wrong with that.

So here’s what it comes down to.  President Clinton, when he campaigned in 1992, had the mantra, “It’s the economy, stupid.” 

Fast forward twenty years, and it’s the same story.  It’s the economy.  It’s jobs.  It’s rebuilding the American Dream.  Too many Americans have been struggling for too long.  Too many Americans want—and need more money. 

You want more money?  Elect me.  I’ll lead by example, using my experience as a rich person.  Under a Romney Administration, we’ll enact policies and practices like I did in my businesses. Those policies will help all Americans, not just the rich ones to get richer.  You grow an economy, you GROW wealth by BUILDING wealth, not by spreading around what a few people already have.  It’s a noble idea to take from the rich and give to the poor.  But it’s not a good long-term business model.  You want poor people to have more money?  Me too.  But if you just give them money that other people have, what happens when that runs out?  Then nobody has any money.  It’s like that old adage, give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day; teach a man to fish and you’ll feed him for a lifetime.  I can teach America how to build wealth so that there are more people with more money, not just a few people forced to share the money they have.  That’s the American way.  We teach each other to fish!  That’s how we help each other!    That’s what made America great, and what will make America great again!

God bless you, and God bless the United States of America!!"

 

If only.

The Fractured States of America

I start to write this having just come from a 9/11 memorial at the fire station, which is kind of ironic considering the subject material. That’s because September 11, 2001 was the day that brought us all together after a contentious 2000 presidential election, in which Al Gore won the popular vote but not the electoral vote. More than half the country had a president it didn’t vote for. Everybody was either Red State or Blue State. We weren’t America anymore. Things were starting to get a little ugly.

But that all changed when some extremist lunatics vaporized nearly 3,000 American civilians on a beautiful sunny Tuesday morning.

Suddenly, American flags were everywhere: on homes, on buildings, sticking out of car windows, hanging off of bridge overpasses. People were donating money by the millions to the Red Cross and other charitable organizations, to help the victims and their families. We were all a little more polite, a little more patient, a little more tolerant. I think we just didn’t know when a plane was going to scream out of the sky into our kitchen, and we didn’t want our last moments on Earth or the last impression on the people around us to be that of an angry jerk.

So we were all on the same page again, with the exception of some wack-a-loons who probably still think 9/11 was an inside job. We invaded Iraq, invaded Afghanistan, killed off most of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, caught and killed Saddam Hussein, bought houses and big flat-screen TVs, put magnets supporting our troops on the backs of our SUVs, and America was great again.

Then we figured out there was no way out of Iraq and that we didn’t do enough in Afghanistan. Then we had another election, and though that one wasn’t as close as 2000, it was probably more rancorous, reopening those Red State/Blue State wounds. Then gasoline went up over 4 dollars a gallon. Then we found out about secret prisons where the people we captured in Iraq and Afghanistan were abused and tortured. We still had no way out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and more and more of our soldiers were dying. We still hadn’t found Bin Laden. People started pointing fingers again. Then the economy tanked—big time—and that was the final straw. We found out that if you hit Americans in their pocketbooks, nothing else really matters. The gloves come off. The left blamed the right for allowing and encouraging all the corruption and greed in Corporate America. The right blamed the left for pushing into houses people that couldn’t afford mortgages, thereby nearly destroying the banking and real estate industries. The president at the time was on his way out, a lame duck who was not going to be able to do thing one about very much at all.

Enter the 2008 election. Now I will state up front that I voted for Barack Obama, but that I would have been, with the exception of knowing Sarah Palin was a 73-year old heartbeat away from the presidency, very comfortable with John McCain as president. I think he’s a good and decent man, just as I think Obama is. But people couldn’t see that. The campaign was broken down to The Empty Suit vs. More Of The Same. It was All Talk, No Action vs. the Grumpy Old Man. And when Obama won, it seemed that, finally, while not a landslide by any means, there seemed to actually be a general feeling of relief that it was over, and a chance for fresh start. Even the classy McCain tried to impart a spirit of cooperation with his concession speech, saying he’d work with the President however he could, and scolding those who booed.

Well, here we are less than eight months into BHO’s presidency, and any feelings of optimism and cooperation have been completely flushed down the toilet. We’ve gone Thelma and Louise into a divide that might not be able to be repaired. Ever.

And the evidence of having reached that divide is stark: I present the boorish behavior of Congressmen Joe Wilson of South Carolina and John Shimkus of—you guessed it—Illinois. During the President’s health care address to a joint session of Congress, Wilson shouted “You LIE!” in the middle of the speech, in front of the whole world. And Shimkus flat got up and walked out. Now, whether you agree with Wilson and Shimkus or not, those are just things you don’t do—at least, apparently, up until now.

Congressman Wilson apologized almost immediately, saying his emotions got the better of him. But a lot of people defended him, saying the breach of respect was justified. And how many of the Republicans who professed dismay over Wilson’s outburst were actually secretly wishing they had the church bells to do that? There was actually such little fallout because of his immediate apology and the President’s subsequent acceptance, that, in fact, the next day, Wilson said that while he stood by his apology, he defiantly said in a web video seeking campaign donations that he wasn’t going to back down from his attacks. Shimkus’s mouthpiece, meanwhile said the Congressman left after hearing the president repeat "an accumulation of rehashed talking points." Nice.

That’s certainly their Founding Fathers-given rights, but I fear the lack of consequences will further embolden those who believe Wilson and Shimkus were justified in their behavior and lead to a complete catastrophic breakdown of any remaining decorum in this country. I’m not just pointing at the right, either. When people on the left do it in the future—and they will—the right will naturally complain, but the excuse will be the ever-popular (and mature!) defense: “but you did it too!”

What bothers me most is that the number of people with whom you can have a logical, reasonable discussion about the issues is evaporating rapidly. It used to be that the only ideologues out there were politicians, old people and college students. But now you can’t talk to a soccer mom without discovering in about point-three seconds where she stands on health care, even if you’re discussing plans for the PTA fundraiser. (Here’s how any phone conversation with my dad can go, by the way—Dad: “So how’s everybody?” Me: “Pretty good. The girls have swimming coming up, and then we’re going to…” Dad [interrupting]: “Yeah, so how about that Nancy f*cking Pelosi. That’s one scary broad. You see what she and Harry Reid are trying to stick in that health care bill?” This is no exaggeration. Except for him interrupting. He might let me finish my sentence.) Either you’re right or you’re left, you’re right or you’re wrong, you goose-step to Rush or guzzle the Olbermann-Aide, and if you don’t agree with me, I’m going to yell at you and insult you until we part ways or come to blows.

And it’s making me very afraid of what’s next. Obviously, any civility or decency in a public forum is completely out the window. The town hall meetings on health care have been bad enough. But with Wilson’s scot-free verbal assault in the middle of the President’s address in the middle of the House of Representatives, it’s just going to get that much worse. You’re going to see a lot more personal attacks on not only our elected officials, but among other people in the room who are in disagreement. You’re going to see a lot more verbally along the lines of what you might have in the past only read in anonymous online comments. If there haven’t already been—and I suspect there have—you’ll see flat-out fistfights at these things. And what’s going to happen when the President makes an appearance somewhere—anywhere? After all, aside, perhaps, from a courtroom, church or funeral parlor, there is no place that’s even close to requiring the decorum expected inside the U.S. Capitol. So what happens when the President makes a campaign stop at a Chick-Fil-A on Main Street, USA? Are we going to see someone HERE throwing a shoe?

Or, perhaps, the unthinkable: someone throwing a bullet?

In fact, I made that comment just last night. I would not be surprised if, in the next three months, somebody takes a shot at him. And then, Katie Rose bar the door.

Somebody won’t go after him because he’s a Democrat. Somebody won’t go after him because of the Economic Stimulus Bill. Somebody won’t go after him because of health care reform. Somebody won’t go after him because of the silliness over his birth certificate. And somebody won’t go after him because he’s black, either, although that will likely be the perception, thus triggering a race war in this country that will make Watts look like a charity picnic.

Somebody will do it because his “emotions got the better of him.” And nothing is off the table anymore.

So to answer the long standing question posed by Rodney King in the wake of the L.A. riots, “Can’ t we all just get along?”—

No. No, we can’t. Sorry, Mr. King. And that means, like all great civilizations that collapse and die under the weight of their own corruption, greed and internal strife, the beginning of the end is, in my humble opinion, coming sooner rather than later for the Fractured States of America.

Election Night

I sit here wishing I could think more about the events of the night before I posted, but I feel a need to chronicle the moment as it happens--for my own personal record, as much as anything.

I saw at precisely 10:00 Central Standard Time the graphic on CNN's wall:

BARACK OBAMA ELECTED PRESIDENT

I felt like a great, giant weight had been lifted from my chest, like some great darkness passed from the sky, and the sun was finally able to warm my face again. And the tears came.

It was not so much a dislike of John McCain, but it was a fruition of hope; it was a realization of a belief. It was the promise of better days ahead. It was about leaving the last administration in the rear view mirror...quickly.

I saw the crowds cheering in Grant Park in Chicago, in New York City, in Los Angeles, in Atlanta, in Kenya, at the White House and other places around the country and around the world. And I thought to myself, when was the last time, if ever, crowds that large and diverse cheered anything besides a sports championship, let alone an elected official in America?

The crowds featured white Baby Boomers cheering, but were energized thoroughly by the younger set. It was beautiful to see so many younger people that excited about politics and government, likely for the first time ever. Whites and blacks, probably strangers, hugged and exchanged high fives. Jesse Jackson, whom I'm no fan of, who stood on that balcony in Memphis in 1968 as Martin Luther King was gunned down, wept. American flags--not Obama/Biden signs--waved by the thousands. A million people--a million people--are expected in Grant Park tonight.

And then I watched John McCain deliver his concession speech. He confirmed what many have said about him all along, and what I suspected as well: that there is no greater patriot alive. John McCain would have made a great president, of that I have no doubt. Sure, I didn't like his campaign, and I didn't like his running mate, but there can be no question as to the man's love for his country and his desire to do right by it. I hope President-elect Obama takes Senator McCain up on his offer to help in whatever capacity he's able. And I hope that McCain's supporters--not the fucking tools who booed when he mentioned Obama during his speech--and those who voted for him will echo his call to offer their hands as well. I thank John McCain for his service to his country and wish him well in the future, and I sincerely hope he continues to act as an advocate for honest, straight talk in government.

The next president is about to speak. I will wrap up for now.

Election Day

Wow. It's finally here. After all the campaigning, all the excitement on both sides, all the negativity, too--it's finally time to make our decision.

What a great day it is to be an American. We didn't invent this system, and other countries have followed suit, but you know what? We perfected it. Sure, there are flaws, but this is about as good as it gets.

Both candidates campaigned for change. I just hope either one can follow through. And I hope there's none of the vitriolic, bile-spewing hate that has surfaced among bar-stool voters on opposite sides of the fence that there was both times W was elected. I'm not just talking about the bumper stickers in 2004 that joked "Re-Elect Gore." I'm talking about the people who were saying things like "George W. Bush is not my president--I didn't vote for him." Guess what...he was, and still is for ten more weeks, your president. A president isn't just president of the people who voted for him, and he's not just president of only the people that agree with him. I didn't like W when he was handed the election over Gore, and I liked him even less when he beat Kerry. But he was my president.

It's easier for me to encourage people to accept the new president because it looks like the horse I'm backing is going to win, if you believe the polls. But if he doesn't, I'd like to think I can give the other guy a chance before I write him off. As I've written before, I believe they're both good, decent men who care deeply about this country and the need to do things differently. I just wish McCain hadn't listened to whomever he did while running his campaign--I think he would have done just as well, perhaps even better--if it weren't so negative. And I think our country would have been better for it.

One last note--did you see the ad the RNC started running last night? It really slammed Obama on Rev. Wright. Fine, that's a valid issue (I guess). But, my goodness--that was about the most horrifying ad I've ever seen. It hit on Obama and how his whole life he's associated himself with extremist radicals, and, oh my Gosh, he must be a closet radical, too. However, if you look at the subtext of the ad, it's not saying Obama is a radical. It's saying, "Don't vote for him--he's black!" If you think it's saying anything else, I'm sorry, but you need to look around for the turnip truck you just fell off of. That's the kind of bullshit I wish would disappear from politics. You see that kind of crap in local races all over the country (there's one in the Peoria area between Jehan Gordon and some other lady that's completely off the damn hook!), but that really should stay out of the national conversation. We're too good for that. I'm not saying there's no place for negative ads--hell, it wins elections--and I'm not saying Obama didn't run any negatives. But the Rev. Wright ad was shameful, especially on the eve of what will be such an historic day, regardless of who wins.

Between a Slug and a Turd

Yesterday I came across somebody’s blog entry that offered this brilliant analysis of this year’s election: the choices for president are between a slug and a turd. Aside from trying to figure out which candidate was the slug and which was the turd, I thought to myself that, wow, that was one disillusioned voter.

No doubt he was tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils, and I can certainly understand that—especially because the last go-round we had to pick between Howdy Doody Dumbass and Flip-Flop McHorseface. But this year, I think I disagree. I actually think we have two people running for president that are competent and genuine.

And, really, that’s all I want in a president: can you do the job, and will you put my interests ahead of your own and ahead of the special interests.

Regardless of which political wing you belong to, I think the problem most people have is with how those in office, once they get elected, make a beeline for the deep pockets of the power brokers that can get them re-elected. After all, what is the one thing all first-term politicians want that is exactly the same? Yep—a second term.

As I’ve said before, I don’t profess to belong to any political party because I think the vast majority of them on both sides are bought and paid for (see Blagojevich, Rod and Ryan, George). I will say, however, that this year, as a matter of complete disclosure, I’m supporting the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. But it’s not because I don’t like John McCain. Sure, I disagree with some of his policies (and certainly his awfully negative campaign—thank you, Karl Rove’s “How to Win an Election for Dummies”—not to mention his choice for VP), but I really think I could live with McCain in the White House.

Why?

Because I honestly think that John McCain, as much as Barack Obama, wants to change the culture in Washington, that he genuinely cares about the good of the people of this country more than his own skin, and that he’s able to step in and do the job with integrity and credibility. I didn’t agree much with Reagan, but was the economy good and did the Russians stay behaved? To quote Tina Fey, “You betcha!”

And to me, that’s all that matters. People get so wrapped up in superficial things (“he didn’t wear a flag pin!”) and irrelevant things (“he’s old!”), or latch onto one issue, that they become completely blind to anything else.
The fact of the matter is both men are qualified to lead this country in a manner befitting the ideals set forth by our Founding Fathers.

But that hasn’t always been the case in the voting booth. So I started to think back about the history of presidential elections—and I came to the conclusion that for the first time in a very, very long time, we’ve actually got two good candidates for president.

Think about it:
2004: Bush vs. Kerry (The Lesser of Two Idiots)
2000: Bush vs. Gore (The One That Got Away)
1996: Clinton vs. Dole (Slick Willie and Captain Viagra)
1992: Clinton vs. Bush (Governor Grab-a-lot and Read My Lips)
1988: Bush vs. Dukakis (Dude, seriously?)
1984: Reagan vs. Mondale (The Cowboy and the Sacrifical Lamb)
1980: Reagan vs. Carter (Heston’s biotch and Joe Powerless)
1976: Ford vs. Carter (I’m glad I was only 4)
1972: Nixon vs. McGovern (Paranoia and The Prairie Populist)
1968: Nixon vs. Humphrey (Tricky Dick and LBJ's puppy)
1964: Johnson vs. Goldwater ("War! War!" or "More War! More War!")
1960: Kennedy vs. Nixon

Stop right there. Kennedy vs. Nixon. That might have been the last time we had two good candidates. Of course, we know what Nixon turned out to be, but back then, he was a sitting vice president under a very popular president (Eisenhower), and might very well have gotten elected had television not been so newly prominent. And, of course, there was Kennedy, with his youth, “vigah”, heroism, and optimism. We never did get to see the full measure of what he could have become, but that wasn’t exactly his fault.

Kennedy vs. Nixon was 48 years ago. My father wouldn’t have been able to vote in that election—he wasn’t old enough yet. How sad it must be for somebody of that generation who has never had two good, decent candidates from which to choose.

I’m as jaded and cynical as they come with respect to the political and governmental process in this country. But if you don’t think the two people running for president this year are at least genuine and competent, whether you agree with them or not, you’ve got a much, much darker view of America than I do. And I feel bad for you—because it might be another few generations before we have this opportunity again.