Politics sans cerebration
It happens every two years, and it's never pleasant. No, it's not Dave's lifelong bout with herpes... it's the plaintive process we call the free election. This year, unremarkably, is particularly unpleasant. I think it has something to do with the landmark nature of the candidates. The first black man with a legitimate chance to win, first woman to be vice president, millionth old white man to venture into the well-charted territory of caucasian leadership. What makes it nearly unbearable is the inherent hypocrisy of both parties. I know politics has turned into (or more aptly, been solidified as) a win-at-all- costs arena. In doing so, however, everyone loses. Two things in particular are paramount in contributing to this decline. One is the inability for any candidate to actually admit error, be it past or present. The other is the manufactured misconception that the American people want their president to be their drinking buddy.On topic number one, I think we can all agree that to err is human and to forgive is...uh...help me out here English majors. If there is one unifying feature throughout all human existence it is our uncanny ability to be wrong. To date, no one has been proven infallible (i can hear the religious zealots now!). So why the big problem with admitting that you were wrong once or twice in the hundreds of decisions you've made in life. I mean, there is something terribly wrong with someone who supports the same policies or ideals over a 40 year career. Folks, enough is enough. Just admit that maybe supporting an initiative in [insert year here] that ended up backfiring was a bad idea. Or admit that blindly following your leader into war was not the best decision that could be made. It's no big deal... look at the approval ratings for the war when we originally went it -- you weren't alone! As far as this whole 'drinking buddy' thing goes, this really makes no sense to me. I am 25 years old and love drinking more than most anything else in the world (next to Bingo, of course). Now, that being said, there are a lot of people I would love to have a beer with. John Lennon, Charles Bukowski, Jack Kerouac and especially Woody Harrelson. Ya know who's not on that list? The President of the United States. I also don't particularly care if he can bowl a 300 game or not. In my opinion the leader of the free world should be someone who I can't really relate to. I don't mean that I want him to be a complete asshole. But I do expect him to be smarter, harder working, more qualified, better spoken and more responsible than me. I look at it like this: if I were starting up a company and I had my choice of partners to work with, would I choose my friend who I go out drinking with every night or the straight A student I sit next to in Finance class? I can't really remember when this need for our president to be a 'common man' started. But I am very upset that it has come to a forefront in this campaign. Obama gets bashed for being a Harvard elitist, McCain catches hell for having 9 houses. Get over it, they are all rich and all much smarter (optionally read as conniving) than most of the country. It's okay! Becoming President is by definition becoming an elitist.
