By R. A. Melos
Anybody But Bush. Weve all seen it, heard it, maybe even said it, but do we mean it? Do we really mean anybody else eligible for the presidency is better than what we currently have in office? Im not backpedaling here, or even defending Bush with a better the devil you know defense. All Im wondering is, do we, those of us who think anybody else is better than Bush, really mean what we say, or are we just caught up in the enthusiasm of a rally cry?
A few months ago I was very much behind Howard Dean, the then democratic presidential nominee frontrunner. In fact, I still think he wouldve made a better nominee than John Kerry. Dean was crucified for showing that he was human, for showing emotion, for showing that he had energy and a will of his own. This isnt to say that John Kerry is a spineless puppet of the political machine. No, Kerry is very much his own man, and seems to be someone who, in his heart, believes George W. and company are liars. I like that in a candidate.
However, are we being realistic with the battle cry of anybody But Bush? After all, we are talking about leadership of the free world. This isnt a position where knowledge of how to work the deep fryer machine means higher pay, it is a position of real power like district manager over all the deep fryer machines. Im not saying Bush is good or trustable, or someone of whom I approve, but by rallying around a war cry of Anybody But Bush are we going from the deep fryer into the fire?
Now I said I wouldnt defend George W., and I wont. I truly feel the man is one of the things wrong with the American political system today, and one of the biggest threats to the American way of life he claims so much to want to protect, but to give the devil, or in my opinion the devils hand puppet, his due, he did do a competent job in the days immediately following 9/11. Okay, thats about all the nice things I can say for the man.
The facts of his past prior to his stay in the White House have no bearing on my voting opinion. I dont care if he showed up for duty as a secretary or chair warmer or whatever he was supposed to be in the National Guard. Im not impressed by military service. The people who fight the wars arent the ones who usually end up leading the country. Or do they?
John Kerry is a decorated Vietnam Vet. Okay, he fought in an undeclared and unpopular war while George W. did not. So? Does this make him more of a man than George W.? No. It does mean he risked his life for a belief in duty, but I know pizza delivery boys who will risk their lives speeding through traffic to deliver a pizza within thirty minutes rather than give it to the customer for free (and possibly lose their jobs for being slow and costing the company $13.75). Thats not to say speedy delivery isnt impressive or that risking life and limb doesnt mean anything to me, because I fully respect the sacrifices john Kerry made.
Yet Im back to the same issue. Is he really the Anybody who can do a better job than George W.? Is it fair to peg Kerry as a simply Anybody? In some ways it seems defeatist of the Democrats to peg their new frontrunner as someone who could easily be replaced by any 35 year-old natural born citizen of the United States. It doesnt show a real belief or support of the candidate based on his ability or his achievements or even his chances of beating Bush. All the ABB marketing shows is a desperate nation stumbling around in the dark, angry with its leadership and willing to replace the current leader with Joe President if enough people can be persuaded to vote for him.
I will say again, I do not like Bush. I do not believe in him, or his plans for the future of America. I do not find the idea of amending the U.S. Constitution to include discrimination an admirable proposal, nor do I believe the current version of war, now marketed with cute names like Operation Iraqi Freedom, is the direction for the country. I do not think Bush is a good man, or that, should he be re-elected for a second term that that term should be followed up with the man I consider to be worse than Bush, Dick Cheney. I am very uncomfortable with our current administration, but I am equally as uncomfortable with the notion that Anybody But Bush will do.
We need a real leader, one without corporate interests, or hidden agendas. We need a person who can guide America into the new century with terrorism as our enemy, without overthrowing other world leaders or simply alienating them at the drop of a hat. We need someone who will not come off as the schoolyard bully, or an overbearing Texan. We do need to get rid of Bush, but not at any cost.
In our haste to rid ourselves of one hanging chad mistake, we are dangerously close to hitching our wagons to a new hero without mustering real enthusiasm for that hero. Its like were giving the sheriffs badge to the gullible guy who rode into town, hoping hell turn out to be Gary Cooper instead of an no account drifter who will be gone in another four years leaving someone else to clean up whatever messes he made in his attempts to clean up the messes of the current sheriff.
I truly do believe we need to get rid of Bush, but Im not feeling confidant about the option. I wont even give Ralph Nader a thought because, well, I know this is shallow but can we really muster up confidence behind President Ralph? I mean, we want the common man to feel comfortable with the leadership of the nation, but Ralph isnt the name of a leader. Now if he changed it to Rafe, then I could feel more confident.
Perhaps the real issue is image? If we stop saying Anybody But Bush, and start a different cry for the people to rally behind, I wouldnt feel so much like were just taking on any old person who happened to show up to run the country. Kerry needs a slogan that will sell him to the people as the man who can beat Bush, and the man who can turn the economy around and reduce the jobless rate, and defend our shores against terrorism. Kerry has got to be our can do man.
See, I feel more confident already. Its all the marketing.
copyright 2004