My pick for president — and why

Posted: August 9, 2008 in America, Source: Marylou's America
Tags: , , , , ,

By Marylou Barry

“Sometimes I lie awake at night and ask, ‘Where have I gone wrong?’” Charlie Brown of Peanuts fame once remarked through his alter ego and illustrator Charles M. Schultz. “Then a voice says to me, ‘This is going to take more than one night.’”

That said, and holding my nose, and wondering just how many nights it would take to figure out how U.S. voters ended up in this political pickle, I must confess that my pick for president this year is Sen. John McCain. By “pick” I mean the candidate I think will win the election, not the one I think should win. Were that the case, we would be seeing a Hunter-Tancredo ticket, with John Bolton breathing down both their necks just to keep them honest.

But instead, we get a highly questionable, open-borders Republican running against a one-term Democrat problematic enough to make even Hillary Clinton look good. Waiting in the wings, until recently, was an independent who is totally clueless about international Islam and takes money from Nazis.

Out of a population of 300 million, is there some reason we can’t do better than this?

In my opinion a Sen. McCain win will hold true whether or not Sen. Obama chooses Hillary Clinton as his running mate. If Hillary picks up the nomination by default because Obama can’t come up with a better looking fake birth certificate, John McCain will still win. Here’s why:

Forget for a moment about what kind of people are running and let’s focus on what kind of people are voting. In a recent article, columnist Sam Sewell quotes some frightening statistics from Pew and Zogby polls which demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that we American people, generally speaking, are morons.

Only about half of us can name the vice president, Sewell says, and only 37 percent can name their state governors (that one goes up to 65 percent, however, when the question is phrased as a multiple choice).

“But wait, it gets worse,” he continues. “Three quarters of Americans can correctly identify two of Snow White’s seven dwarfs while only a quarter can name two Supreme Court justices.

“According to the poll by Zogby International, 57 percent of Americans could identify J.K. Rowling’s fictional boy wizard as Harry Potter, while only 27 percent could name both of their U.S. senators. Only 42 percent of those surveyed could list the three branches of our government. But 75 percent could name the Three Stooges.”

Yeah, Potter and the dwarfs – they’re going to reclaim our tottering sovereignty and nonexistent border and prevent Sharia from taking over our cities. And if the jihad attempt on our second highest building succeeds next time it is tried, well, we’ll just call the Stooges. After all, it took a couple of tries to bring down the first one, too.

Karl Marx was wrong. Religion is not the opiate of the people. Popular culture is the opiate of the people, and the Entertainment Generation is inhaling deeply. What will it take to stir them out of their stupor?

“Don’t expect the American people to vote on issues,” Sewell laments. “They almost never do.”

What people do vote on, he says, is which candidate they see as the more parental, the one they think would do the best job of taking care of them. Citing the views of the late psychologist Erich Fromm, he opines that most people are scared to death of being adults and the responsibilities it entails. Therefore, many opt for the nanny state – or the nanny candidate – so they can get back to the boob tube for another four years, confident that all will remain well. That dynamic will hand the election to McCain, Sewell says, because Obama is just too young for the role of Our Father in Washington.

I agree with his conclusion, but for a slightly different reason. I think the average pop culture, post-Christian era American voter, however detached he may be from reality, still doesn’t take kindly to being threatened. And I think he views arrogant foreigners who crash jumbo jets into buildings in his homeland as, well, threatening. Like most rational beings, he at least values his own life and the lives of people he cares about. He knows, or he will know by November if we keep telling him, that Obama has the endorsement of such people and may even have been raised in such a culture himself. That voter lived through 9/11, even if vicariously by satellite. It didn’t sit well with him, and he has a long memory. According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, his negative view of Islam has increased from 39 percent immediately after the 2001 attack to 46 percent in 2006. Why should he opt for a president with that kind of baggage when he can have one without it?

So, who will be our next president? Unless unexpected events intervene to propel a Barr or Gingrich-type longshot into a viable candidacy, John McCain. Is that a good thing? Probably not. But I’d be surprised if this hasn’t been the globalist strategy all along: to force us not only to choose the unacceptable by threatening us with the even more unacceptable, but to be grateful for the former by comparison.

Indeed, “Where did we go wrong?” may be a question we ought to start asking ourselves much earlier in the nomination process.

Advertisements

Comments are closed.