Log in

No account? Create an account

last | next

Beauty and the Eye of the Beholder

The presidential field of candidates has been narrowed beyond repair, and November will be upon us before we know it. While my friend Beth holds out hope that Ron Paul is still a dark horse contender, it's clear that we're dealing with two nominees here: Senators Barack Obama and John McCain. Forget for a moment that Biden or Palin will probably end up as our president within a few years' time (or less) due to death, natural or otherwise. The fact is, right now, it's  down to Obama and McCain, and many, if not most, of us have already decided who our next president should be.

When I think about which candidate speaks to me and my issues, I honestly say neither. Obama's speeches are eloquent and firm, but so is a good rigatoni if it's prepared properly. McCain has experience on his side; however, George H.W. Bush had eight years of practice (aside from whatever political background he drew from) as Vice President before he was elected, and look what we got from him: four years of nothing. Well, except the first Gulf War that eventually led to the next Gulf War. (Insert generic "Like Father, Like Son" cliche here.)

Frankly, I find it all bullshit, plain and simple. And I don't mean that as in, "You lost your job? That's bullshit!" I mean bullshit that spouts from politicians' mouths in the form or promises, hyperbole, rhetoric, and backstabbing. Obama says that Palin is lipstick on a pig; McCain camp retorts, "How dare you call our future Vice President a pig!" Yada yada yada, ad nauseum. So over it.

But the fact remains, I must vote. I'm Amuhrican, ayuh? It's my right, privilege and duty to vote, whether I find that a candidate meets my criteria or not. In recent years, it's been more about voting for the lesser of two evils: Bush won a second election as the devil we knew versus the Herman Munster that we didn't. Which leads me to a good point: appearance and attractiveness as it relates to electability. George W. Bush is not a particularly dashing fellow, but John Kerry is utterly Lurch-like. Look who the Democrats offered up as their leading contenders this year: Hillary Clinton, a pretty, mature woman with a great smile, and Obama, a handsome, young man with a strong brow. Most folks who have an opinion on this topic think that John F. Kennedy was elected on his looks, or perception of his looks; footage of his debate with a very milquetoast-appearing Richard Nixon is used to support this point. Hillary missed out on the nomination because, apparently, there are more straight women and gay men than there are straight men and lesbians. Or, at least, the former two demographics vote in larger numbers than the latter, which I firmly believe.

I can't escape this aspect when I think about the impending presidential election, especially since I have no preference in either candidate in terms of their backgrounds, speeches, proposed policies, or other qualifications. I'm also conflicted as a registered Democrat and a liberal, Left-Wing, card-carrying queer. You see, I don't like black men. I know how that might sound, so let me clarify. I don't personally find black men attractive in the same way as I find non-black men attractive. It's no more a prejudice than that of a person who prefers redheads over blonds, thinner women over shapely women, or taller men over shorter men. It's just how my brain is wired. My brain is also wired in such a way that I tend to be attracted to older white men. Sound like anyone we know?

Looks like McCain's got my vote.



( 5 comments — leave a comment )
Sep. 10th, 2008 08:12 pm (UTC)
Obama's pig remark was not in the least in reference to Ms. Palin. Your having been mislead is, all by itself, proof positive of how smart a choice Palin was. The electorate has been spared the tiresome chore of thinking about the common good; they have instead the newest reality TV show to ogle.

I've been hollering for nigh on a year that everybody up for the job is an asshole. I don't for one minute think Obama's going to take back the reins of this country from the oilmen and other filthy rich fucks who now control our entire federal government. Dunno whether he could if he wanted to. He doesn't. However, I find it jaw-droppingly insane that you "have no preference in either candidate in terms of their backgrounds, speeches, proposed policies..." Have you actually heard or read said speeches? Have you heard or read the policies? These guys are night and day re social policy.
Sep. 10th, 2008 10:05 pm (UTC)
Even if it wasn't directed toward Palin or placed in a context with her in mind, either Obama or his speech writers had the concept of femininity in their subconscious when they suggested its use at this time in campaign, a week after McCain's announcement of his very feminine running mate.

Of course, I'm "jaw-droppingly insane," so there wasn't much point in my responding, except to therefore affirm such insanity. And before you even think "I didn't say you were jaw-droppingly-insane," save it. It's just lipstick on a pig.
Sep. 11th, 2008 04:03 pm (UTC)
This is satire, right?
Sep. 11th, 2008 04:20 pm (UTC)
Sep. 11th, 2008 05:24 pm (UTC)
Oh, thank dog...I thought you had gone over the edge! Because regardless of what you may think of these candidates in some ways, the social policies of Obama are MUCH preferred by GLBT folks over that of McPain/Palin.

Also, I think you were correct in that whomever is sworn in in 2009, the Veep will end up with the job.
( 5 comments — leave a comment )