I have NEVER voted for a Republican for any office in my 35 years as a registered voter. But this year, I am voting for McCain/Palin.
Obama is dangerously inexperienced at executive leadership, national security, economic policy, dealing with aggressive opponents. He runs on a promise of “bringing people together.” The Democrats seem lost in dreams of restoring an imagined glorious past when what is needed is the courage to confront serious new threats to the American way of life.
Charles Krauthammer has written that the Italian communist party could win this election, given our perceived economic problems. Obama paints himself as the answer to our woes. Is it only Charles (and me, and Slate editor David Plotz) who would draw the obvious analogy: Obama as Mussolini?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not calling him a dictator. But I am suggesting that “bringing people together” as practiced by Obama is essentially a totalitarian impulse.
What is totalitarianism? According to Merriam-Webster online, it is “of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy.”
The Obama event I attended in Doylestown, PA sent me home in frustration and marked the end of my flirting with voting for him; I felt like everyone had already drunk the kool-aid before I got there. No one could answer my questions about his positions on economic issues or national security…but several assured me that “Barack would never do anything that would harm this country.” The speaker made a point of indicating that this wasn’t just about an election, it was about future opportunties to come together in a movement. A movement for what, I thought? It was a women’s event, and the only campaign flyers available were on health care and child care…a future of being pandered to?
The Presidency is not the therapist in chief. He is not our savior. He is an executive with responsibility for national security, for promoting economic prosperity, and ensuring that the country functions well. As a politician, the president needs to be popular enough to lead. But “bringing people together” is only the first step, not the end game that a panderer like Obama claims. A courageous president needs to tell us things we don’t want to hear and build support for unpopular action.
But Obama tells us that the election is about us, invites us to find our purpose through his campaign. He tells us that he is a post-racial candidate and invites us to celebrate American progress by electing him as a symbol. In both cases, he changes the subject: I would like to change it back. The election is about him: is he qualified?
Obama is a failed community organizer; he accomplished nothing lasting for the steelworkers of Chicago. His state senate career is undistinguished. Ditto for his US Senate career. His big speeches are long on spectacle (ala the best totalitarians!) and ultra-short on substance.
Not the kind of guy I want to see leading our country.
