It is always interesting to watch the media shape the electoral possibilities during the early stages of the presidential campaign. Those who still operate under the illusion that America is a democracy, even the limited form of democracy known as representative democracy, would do well to study the process by which prospective candidates are divided into permissible and not permissible categories.
Advertisement - story continues below
The media's preferred term is, of course, ''electable'' and ''unelectable'', but it is easy enough to show that these are inaccurate and intentionally misleading terms. For example, a reasonable observer would conclude that the two most unelectable candidates of the apparent field are Rudy Giuliani and B. Hussein Obama.
It's worth noting that Giuliani couldn't win a Senate race against a carpet-bagging Hillary Clinton, holds a panoply of views that are expressly contrary to his nominal party's platform, is a poor speaker and has no record of achievement except for having successfully fought crime in a single city. His candidacy is primarily based on his grand accomplishment of ''holding the city together after 9/11'', which is about as nebulous as an accomplishment can get and still be articulated; it's not as if New Yorkers were on the verge of breaking into civil war or fleeing the city en masse and leaving an empty, depopulated shell behind.
Moreover, there's a reason Newt Gingrich didn't dare list New York City and Washington D.C. among his list of potential targets should Iran acquire only three nuclear devices. Considering the very low esteem in which those two cities are held by a substantial minority of Americans, Gingrich's attempted scaremongering would have had the opposite effect. Indeed, if Ahmadinejad would only promise to take out Hollywood with his third nuke, he'd probably find it easier to raise funds across America than UNICEF.
(We pause here for a moment to allow the professionally offended to take a deep breath and commence with the shrieking. ... The point, which will no doubt be ignored, is that ''saving New York City'' isn't necessarily the big national plus that the New York-based media believes it to be.)
Amazingly, B. Hussein's candidacy is even less credible than the sometime drag queen's. While Obama is, as Sen. Joe Biden informs us, an exemplary Negro who can be trusted not to break into inopportune rap or be found in the company of young women with an unaccountable predilection for poop-rolling, there are a few small matters such as the cocaine use, the Muslim schooling and the mysterious biographical gaps to be taken into account. And given that the American electorate has not hitherto been prone to electing many blacks, senators or people named Hussein as their president, his oft-asserted ''electability'' is more than a little suspect.
Advertisement - story continues below
A comparison with Tom Tancredo is illuminating. Rep. Tancredo is an elected politician of no particular achievement in the forefront of one of America's most popular political movements, the anti-illegals wave. Obama is an elected politician of no particular achievement primarily known for being black and taking showers. Which one sounds more ''electable'' to you? Naturally, the media has announced that America is pining for a leader who doesn't fear running water and they will repeat this ad infinitum until it becomes sufficiently true.
Of course, as the recent polls demonstrate, no one actually intends to vote for Obama. He is merely a feel-good candidate, one who allows white liberals to engage in their ritual demonstration of moral superiority prior to voting for whoever the party machinery decides will be its standard bearer. Since the Democratic anointment has already fallen upon the Lizard Queen, Obama merely serves as a much-needed distraction for the next eighteen months, for which his reward will likely be the vice-presidency.
Since the Republicans are showing every sign of nominating the only sort of candidate who could lose to Ms. Rodham-Clinton, a pro-war moderate Republican guaranteed to keep conservatives home on election day, the only way Hillary can blow her chances of becoming President Rodham is by failing to tack right on immigration during the general campaign. Whichever party runs anti-Iraq and anti-illegals will claim the Cherry Blossom Throne, at this point, the only candidate likely to do so is the Lizard Queen.
And don't forget that none of this means either of those policies will change once she has ascended the throne, changed her name and shed her human skin. She'll be far too busy making use of the Patriot Acts and other liberty-enhancing tools which the present regime has so helpfully constructed in preparation for her coming.
As for me, I tend to agree with those who argue that Americans deserve better and shouldn't be content with settling for the lesser evil. Fa'thagn Cthulhu! Cthulhu 2008!