Republicans under a merciless spotlight
For flawed candidates, no place to hide
Steve Chapman
January 12, 2012
The Republican presidential race is now moving on from New Hampshire to South Carolina, but it's really taking place in an upside-down Lake Wobegon — where all the men are homely, all the women are weak and all the candidates are below average.
Which has been the state of Republican Presidential Candidates since George H. W. Bush - Robert Dole? George W Bush? John McCain? (Actually, Mike Huckabee was a fine candidate, just not one that corporate America, and therefore Corporate-owned-media-America could snuggle up to - he might have actually gone and done some good for po' folk, as is DEMANDED by both Testaments of the Christian Bible.
We are often told that modern campaigns generate rivers of pointless trivia and shameful misinformation. But this one has served ably to do something that is as valuable to voters as it is unwelcome to the Republican Party: put a merciless spotlight on the mammoth flaws of every aspirant.
Modern mass media COVERAGE of modern campaigns generate OCEANS of pointless trivia and shameful misinformation; to date, this has failed to put a spotlight on the mammoth flaws of media coverage of the campaigns which invariably focuses on the most trivial of all possibilities - whether or not the candidate "knows himself," "dresses authentically," has a spouse that "dresses badly," the candidates "character," which invariably begins as a story line agreed to by all the pundits (puny dick heads - ESPECIALLY the cunt Maureen Dowd) as in "Al Gore is a serial liar, just like William Jefferson Clinton," as in "Al Gore claimed he invented the inernet," etc, etc, ad nauseum, ad nauseum.
There are people who yearn for the short political campaigns in parliamentary countries like Britain, where the process of choosing a national leader is over before Rick Perry can count to three.
Too bad none of these people write about or report on the US campaigns - breathlessly - who has raised the most money? who is winning the horse race?
But in those places, candidates are generally well-known and thoroughly vetted before they offer themselves for the nation's highest office. Here, random individuals are apt to follow the example of Joan of Arc, called to service by voices only they can hear.
I suggest Saint Joan heard the voice of the Lord God Almighty, and plenty of people OUGHT to be able to hear that voice, and even more of them ought to be able to recognize one so called forth.
But as she discovered, an auspicious beginning doesn't assure a happy outcome. In a long, expensive, nonstop campaign like this one, first impressions mean nothing. What matters is enduring appeal. Or, at least, tolerability over time.
Jeez, Lou-Ease, just admit it - corporate America has the biggest hard on of its life for Barry O - the corporate whore, who has spent more time on his knees sucking corporate cock than a Bangkok Whore while the American sailors are on shore leave.
The wide-open nature of presidential politics makes the contest as unpredictable as cow-pie bingo. Candidates who appear formidable while watching from the sidelines turn out to be inept on the field. Candidates who seem laughably unlikely at the outset suddenly take flight on the wings of destiny — before eventually plunging back to earth.
That's the value of the endless debates and media scrutiny. They expose every liability a candidate labors to conceal, while demolishing every asset the candidate presumes to publicize.
There is a perfectly accurate way to gage how a candidate will behave, what types of legislation he will advocate and attempt to advance upon winning election to office - just like real estate - look at the record; look at the record; look at the candidate's voting record.
Perry started out looking like a rugged cowboy but soon gave voters the impression he would try to milk a bull. Herman Cain unveiled a "999" plan that, it turned out, represented the number of women he has hit on. Michele Bachmann, who made headway on the assumption that Republicans wanted a little bit of crazy, offered more than they could take.
NOBODY with the nick-name "Good Hair" could ever be considered to be or ever have been a "real" cowboy. Cain has probably hit on way more than 999 women, but, he was usually so drunk, he has his excuse for not remembering all set up. Republicans don't merely want a "little bit of crazy," they want bat-shit loopier than a slave owner who father's dozens of children a year to his female slaves.
Newt Gingrich talked himself to the top of the Iowa polls and then talked himself back down. No one ever left a Gingrich encounter wanting to hear more.
This is likely to be the definitive line of the media coverage of the Republican primaries. Nice job, there, Steverino, old boy.
Rick Santorum, offering himself as a clear conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, got a big "no thanks" from New Hampshire voters. Even in the Republican Party, he has demonstrated, you can be too anti-gay. Jon Huntsman found that you can also be too reasonable.
Ron Paul, meanwhile, has unearthed surprising evidence that many Republicans think the battle against big government should not stop at the water's edge. Unlike Barack Obama and George W. Bush, they are not eager to launch attacks on other countries or take on massive nation-building projects.
Paul sounds eerily like the Bush who ran in 2000 — promising we would be "a humble nation." So he has no chance of getting the nomination of a party in thrall to endless war.
Romney remains the candidate for Republicans who are willing to settle, which is not most of them. His two chief credentials for high office are a career in private equity investment and one term as governor of Massachusetts, and he has been busy explaining away both.
He has had to downplay his signature achievement in government, a health insurance program that inspired the Obama administration plan so detested on the right. He has had to pretend that Bain Capital was in the business of creating jobs, as though making money were an inconsequential afterthought.
Romney's best bet for conservative credibility, oddly, is absorbing attacks from more conservative candidates. Gingrich and Perry, who regard Obama as a socialist for his attacks on the alleged excesses of capitalism, now attack Romney for profiting from the alleged excesses of capitalism.
Both invoke Ronald Reagan 10 times a minute, but it's impossible to imagine Reagan denouncing private equity firms as "vultures" with a "mentality of making money against all other considerations," as Perry did, or depicting Bain Capital as "rich guys looting companies," as Gingrich did.
Once their campaigns are over, these two have a bright future with Occupy Wall Street. Meanwhile, they may achieve the feat of making Romney look like a man of consistency and principle.
Unreal? Sure. But in this race, unreality is the new reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment