Who's gonna be President?

Haven't gotten political since the great illegal immigrants foray a few months ago, So I thought we were about due.

Talking with various and sundry people over the past few weeks, I have heard quite a few of them refer to the upcoming presidential election this November with words to this effect: "Well, I can't really stand either of them, so it'll be like picking the lesser of two evils."

And two things immediately spring to my mind: First, I hear people say this every election. I said it myself back in 2004 during Kerry vs Bush 2.0. And secondly, what? Really? It seems like ever since Mitt Romney dropped out, all my Mormon friends have been saying this, and ever since Hillary dropped out, all my medical school friends have been saying this.

So okay, fine, complain that your poster child didn't make it. I, for one, am ecstatic that Romney will not be president. I do think he's a good dude, and as honorable as a politician can be, but I don't think the country or world is ready for a Mormon president. The scrutiny that the church would come under if the entire planet based their views of the LDS church on one man. Not that the church can't handle scrutiny, there's nothing to hide here. It's just that I don't trust the average person to take facts at face value.

But besides all that, Romney had a misconceived health care plan, was downright xenophobic when it came to the immigration issue (don't imagine many Mexicans sneak into Massachusetts, that's a pretty long walk), and it just rubbed me the wrong way that everyone assumed I'd vote for him just because of religion. Those who would vote for him just because he's LDS are just as misguided as those who refuse to vote for him for the same reason.

But all that's in the past, now, since he dropped out. Okay, let's talk Hillary. Holy smokes, am I glad I don't have to deal with her for the next four years. Not even as VP. Look at her, do you think she would settle for second banana? Her health plan was better than others, but still wouldn't solve much. I had a talk with a friend recently, who was sad Clinton dropped out, because "she was the only one who seemed to really want it." Well, that's exactly why I didn't want her in office. She wanted it too badly. Not to serve, or at least, that wasn't her primary goal. She wanted to be president just so she could be president. And those are the people who should never be president.

And so we are left with McCain and Obama. Who to pick? I'll be the first to admit that I don't study up on the issues as much as I should. I don't have in-depth knowledge of their campaign plans, or their platforms, or their strategy (or lack thereof) to implement their pet projects once in the White House. But I also think those things matter a little bit less than many people think. The whole structure of our government is so that no one man can accrue too much power. It's not like we are electing a king here. Blame Bush 2.0 for the wars in Iraq? Fine, but Congress has to approve and pay for it, so it's not like he did it all on his own. Blame the plummeting economy on George? There's no way. The chairman of the Federal Reserve has more power on the day-to-day happenings of the stock market and interest rates than the president will ever have, and hardly anyone even knows his name. The president can make laws, sure, but Congress can throw them out, and so can the Supreme court. The president appoints people to positions, and that is a legitimate thing to take into consideration, but remember that we as citizens appoint every single person in the legislative branch, so...... where was I going with this? Oh, yeah: There is more to the running of this country than the president. Really. He's the guy that leads the military and does all that ambassador stuff. So he's about as effective as if you put the Queen of England in fatigues and gave her a War Room to pace across.

Which is all a round-about way of saying that nobody likes to base their vote for president on personality and public speaking ability and diplomatic acumen, but those are the things the president spends all his time doing once elected. I'm oversimplifying, of course. But not by much.

Which is why I am fine with voting for Obama. Does he have an in-depth plan for implementing the "change" he blathers on about? If he does, I don't know what it is. And I'm okay with that. Because what Obama is able to do is to get people excited, inspire people (either up or down, depending on who is listening), and put a positive face on the political process; all of which are part of the job description. "But he smokes!" you say, horrified. Yeah, so what? He's not perfect. He's stated publicly that it's a dirty habit, and he wishes he never would have started, and that he's trying to quit. "But he admits he has done illegal drugs in the past!" you add, even more horrified. Yes! Exactly! He admits it! That's what you want, right? Someone who will honestly admit past faults, and not try to explain them away or deny they ever happened? The Republicans absolutely cannot play the morality card here. McCain has likely done all of those things Obama has. You wanna talk morality? How McCain is now on his third wife, who he met while still married to his second wife, who is 30 years younger that him and got kicked out of her parent's company because of her drug habit and embezzlement?

Obama's unamerican, though. He doesn't wear a flag pin on his lapel, and doesn't salute during the national anthem. In reverse order, those pictures were taken at the beginning of the song, before he had a chance to put his hand up. This last fourth of July, I was late in saluting the flag because I was in the middle of drinking a bottle of water, and didn't want to get myself soaking wet by immediately dropping the water in order to salute. And as far as the lapel pin thing goes, I was under the impression that true patriotism involved work, time, and sacrifice, and was not dependant upon taking five seconds to pin a piece of metal to your clothes. Let's not get caught in the trap of thinking the symbol more important than the thing it symbolizes.

And as for all that crap about him associating with terrorists and hate-mongers, like his old reverend, well.... honestly, just think about it. Have you ever had someone you were close to say something embarrassing and offensive? I embarass and offend Cara all the time. Heaven help her if she ever runs for public office, apparently. Do you beleive in every single thing that every one of your friends do? If so, then you are woefully two-dimensional and need to round out your life with associates who don't just tell you everything you want to hear. So Obama went to that church and had a good relationship with a fiery black minister, swell. Obama never agreed with those things, and has professionally distanced himself, so what more do you want?

Not that Obama's a golden child, though. He's a little bit elitist, doesn't really know what's going on in white, midwestern, conservative families (which make up a pretty big swath of the nation), and has only had legislative experience so far with no executive background.

And McCain? He has a strong record as Governor, and being in an executive position gives him background and insight into the office of president that a legislative background like Obama's can't match. To be honest, I'd be fine having him as president.

So, to all the naysayers and prophets of doom - relax. "Picking the lesser of two evils?" Come on, try to be a bit more optimistic than that. How about choosing the better of two good choices? I pick Obama, but that's just me.