For the past six months I have witnessed the charade that passes as our Presidential Primary process. It looks more like "star search" or "American Idol". it bears little resemblance to the careful selection of a true "Leader".
That is what we are after, is it not? We seek a true leader with experience, intelligence and the strength of character to face the difficulties that are before our weakened nation today.
What the political process presented us with was;
On the Republican side, a former minister/governor who had good character but little else. We also had a former governor/businessman/multi millionaire who was not trusted because of his religious background.
The Republicans also offered Ron Paul, a wing nut with great ideas but no sense of reality.
We ended up with a septegenarian war hero who isn't trusted by his own party and who is a very poor debater.
The conservatives don't trust him, the Veterans don't like him and ....he has ailienated the Christian right who claim to have put "W" in office.
On the Democratic side we had a former first lady who thought she was going to a coronation, not a primary.
They also gave us a former VP candidate with a $1,000 haircut. He "looked Mahvelous" but was another talking head.
Your favorite now is Mr Obama. As I see it, he doesn't know what to tell you but he will say nothing in such an eloquent way that you will swoon over his charm. The Chinese can't be charmed and neither can the Iranians. But he promises to try....just for a change.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Okay, you get a lot of agreement here. It is a popularity contest with no holds barred, and it does not represent a good way to pick a leader. But it is what we've got. And if you think the primaries are bad, take a look at the general election! We're still using a system invented in 1776 (or so). No to mention the totally unbridled (unbridleable?) onslaught of misinformation without repercussions. Not to mention how the current system, where - hell, I don't even know how to express this. What I want to say is this - Election Day should be, I think, handled differently. I don't pretend to have the right answer, but there are a couple of things I'd like to throw out for discussion: 1) a country wide timeframe for the polls to be open. Open the poles at midnight in California, and close them at midnight in New York, for instance. (sorry Hawaii and Alaska.....) The important thing is that East Coast results don't affect West Coast voting, etc. Which brings up number 2: For national elections, blackout any results related information until the polls close! I know, the Constitution, freedom of this and that. Well, I think national elections - the presidential election - need special rules. Not only do I hate (and avoid) the 'full election day coverage' with projections, speculation, etc., etc., I believe it can affect the results, and I believe it should not. (now off of soapbox)
I certainly agree with your assessment of the 'candidates'. But I have to say this - of that whole group, if those are your choices, who but Obama could you pick? Well, by process of elimination I believe Obama wins. For me it's more than that. To me he is a leader. He has the qualities to lead. He is intelligent, straightforward, strong. So he doesn't just get my vote by default, as has happened so many times before.
Post a Comment