Blagnet.net

Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich

A friend of mine, Chris, wrote a cheerful and optimistic note about the upcoming election on Facebook:

Due to extreme boredom, a desire to exercise my brain, and the fact that I am still apparently unqualified to be hired for any job in the Athens area, I have decided to write a series of profiles on the remaining candidates for President of the United States. This was prompted, more than anything else, by my realization the past few weeks that despite how forcefully George W. Bush has attempted to destroy this country and everything that it stands for during the past seven years, I am still completely, unabashedly in love with the American political system.

The Founding Fathers, though far from perfect themselves (Hello? Slave-owners? Come on, guys), created a work of such staggering beauty that it still stands as the envy of the entire world. No matter the lengths to which various politicians over the years have gone to wipe out the purest essence of our country’s democratic process (and still are going, *cough*Diebold*cough*), our presidential elections nevertheless still manage to connect us back to that simpler time when all we wanted was to be our own people, free from the tyranny of a monarch or the oppression of an empire. George Washington essentially created the concept of the presidency as he went along, having no precedent in history on which to base his actions as the democratically-elected leader of a free people. He made the decision to limit his service to two terms, as otherwise he knew he would be guilty of becoming the very thing from which his country had fought so mightily before to detach themselves: a king.

From this benevolent decision, we received the gift of hope for the future. Even when the worst possible thing has happened and we “elect” (and I use that word in the loosest form possible) a man who continually stands in direct opposition to the principles espoused in our founding documents, shamelessly leads thousands to their deaths in a meaningless war, and in everything he does conveys a message to the world that America does not consider itself beholden to anything or anyone…we still have hope. Our leaders do not ignore elections and declare themselves leaders for life, because they know that despite how lazy, fat, and stupid Americans may often seem (and we do), we still possess that primal spirit of revolution in our souls which would not in a million years allow it. As staggeringly slow as the Bush administration has slimed its way across the last few years, in less than a year’s time, it will be but a nightmarish memory for the country, akin to waking up after a long night of drinking and wondering what the hell we were thinking in the first place. The new president will have plenty of cleaning up to do in the Bush wake, but the wonderful thing about this scenario is that it is an inevitability and not simply a possibility. We do not often reflect on how incredible that reality is for us, but every four years, we are given the chance to do so.

As you might have guessed, I’ve also been watching way too much of “The West Wing.” This show, regardless of your political affiliation, inspires so much hope and wonder at what the future can hold, that you almost feel an intoxication of idealism after watching every episode. And though my profile on him is forthcoming, I do want to say right away that the only person in my lifetime that has made me feel the full power of this country’s awesome potential is Barack Obama. I saw it in him when he gave his address to the Democratic convention in 2004 (find it on YouTube if you haven’t seen it, I beg you), and I prayed for even a sliver of his optimism and charisma to seep into the candidacy of John Kerry and other Democrats. That didn’t happen, of course. But again…there was hope. That hope has finally arrived in 2008. Barack Obama personifies that spirit of wonderful uncertainty on which this country was founded. We were rescued from tyranny then, and we need someone to rescue us from tyranny once again. He’s our man.

Yes…we…can

It makes me happy for Chris that he is so fired up for a candidate in November, assuming of course that Obama defeats Clinton and wins the Democratic nomination. As it stands now, it seems that the GOP nominee is going to be John McCain, and if I were forced to choose between the socialist or the fascist, I would probably send my vote Obama’s way, simply over the single issue of Iraq.

But therein lies the problem. To borrow heavily from South Park, my choice this November comes down to choosing between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich. A number of my co-workers that I’ve spoken with feel the same way: they aren’t talking about who they want to vote for, but who they will vote against. Not only that, but it seems several people I’ve spoken with have felt this way about every election. And this is supposed to make me think democracy is good?

To further illustrate the failures of democracy, consider Bush’s approval rating. You’ll often hear that our Monkey-in-Chief’s approval rating is in the mid-twenties, one of the lowest in history. Broadcasters will say this with a solemn face, and question if the President is out of touch with our country, but with simple logic we can conclude that he’s in touch with at least a fourth! Are these one in four people wrong, simply because the other three - which, don’t be mistaken, I would be a member of - say they disagree? Because we three outnumber this one, should we then proceed to force our opinions and will upon that single figure? Imagine we were to line up one hundred people in a row, and to each we would pose the same question: “Do you approve of the way Bush is running this country?” One by one, going down the line, we hear continuous and resounding “No”s until the very last person speaks and replies with a meek “Yes”. In this scenario, Bush’s approval is a paltry 1%, yet should that one person concede to the others simply because he is in the minority? My answer is a resounding No! This country was founded with the idea that we should cater to the individual, and not the great collective. And the best way to cater to a single individuals needs is to simply leave him be; let him live the life he chooses to lead.

Yet, every four years we are told we must elect some great official that will lead our country into the “right” direction. Between the some odd three hundred million residents of America, we must pick just one individual who will represent all of us. John and I are of very similar political ideologies, yet I’m sure we could find at least one issue that the two of us disagree on. Just to make a silly example, say John likes apples and I like oranges, and this is the only difference between the two of us. If we were to elect some official between the two of us, obviously we would want someone who has the same mindset as us, but what would should this official’s stance on the Apples vs. Oranges debate be? If the representative likes apples, then he represents John more than myself, and the reverse is true if our man enjoys the citric goodness of oranges. When we add a third person to the mix who disagrees with both John and myself over a completely different issue - say, this person wants Universal Health Care - it greatly complicates the matter.

Electing a single person to represent the entire wants of the entire country is an intractable problem. In fact, intractable isn’t a strong enough word. The problem is impossible. So how do we solve this impossibility? I suggest the same resolution that most people would find insane: we don’t try to solve it. We don’t need to decide on some great leader every four years. Even if we were to reduce the election time to every three years, two years, six months, or every week does not reduce the problem in the slightest. I can make the decisions for myself just fine; if I need to vote, I’ll vote with my dollar by buying some good or service you are able to provide cheaply. Allow others to do the same; let them live their lives how they want without trying to figure out which one person can speak for everyone. We don’t need this silly and archaic thing that we seem to revere called democracy.