Barack Obama and the Muslim Connection?

In the last several weeks, you may have heard or read those emails claiming that Barack Obama is a Muslim.  Although for most people, the truth has been set straight that Barack Obama is not a Muslim, the larger point often is missed, and like most points that are missed, it is the more important one.  To me, the fundamental question is not whether Obama is Muslim, but whether it should even matter to the American public that he is Muslim?

I’m sure some of the reasonable people out there are already answering that question with an answer that goes something like this, “Well, it goes to his character.  If he said he wasn’t Muslim but a Christian, but he really is a Muslim, you have to ask why he would lie like that?  I can’t trust someone like that.”

That’s a perfectly reasonable answer.  But I’m sure for the majority of those people who gave that answer, what response would you give if Barack always said he was a Muslim to begin with?  The answer would probably boil down to, “I like Barack and his policies but frankly, I just don’t trust the guy.  I can’t put a finger on it.”

Political correctness has just given us new codewords.  Discrimination is still discrimination though, even by another name.

The media, along with Obama’s supporters, have for the most part taken great strides in “debunking the myth” that Obama is a Muslim.  But they haven’t taken the next step, or even the a priori step, of contending why that question is flawed to begin with.  In an election of name calling, both Obama and McCain’s attempt to put the “Muslim question” into a nice, little soundbite is not so much an example of weak political will, but the failure of the United States to be truly an inclusive place for all.

It’s that whole idea, somehow, that being called a “Muslim,” or being associated with a “Muslim,” is akin to being on the side of a terrorist.  Of course, McCain doesn’t say this directly nor does Obama.  They are politicians, after all.  Of course, there are people out there — and I’m sure if you have a yahoo or google account, you surely have received these emails — arguing that there is a fundamental connection between Islam and terrorism, and that anyone who is a Muslim must be a terrorist by default.  

The question I ask is whether McCain and Obama’s actions have essentially extended this same message?  For McCain’s part, he doesn’t do enough to quell the members of the right who are constantly trying to paint Obama as a terrorist, with suggestions that he is, in fact, a Muslim.  McCain and Palin, for their part, discuss in the most ominous of ways, Obama’s “past” catching up to him and why no one should trust him.  For Obama’s part, he doesn’t do enough to raise the question to his constituents of why it is irrelevant what his religion is in determining whether he is “patriotic” enough to be president.  In the end, for both candidates, their claims that the U.S. is an inclusive country just rings hollow. 

After all, have you seen any of these candidates visiting a Mosque?  I haven’t.  I’m sure none of these candidates would want to be caught dead within 500 miles of one. 

Change we can believe in?  For whom?

Advertisements

“Poor Sarah” (Or How Judith Warner Type Reasoning Can Lead To Shocking Results Come November)

First, let me get this out of the way:  I will not be voting for McCain/Palin.  With that said, though, I almost feel compelled to write about NY Times Domestic Disturbances writer Judith Warner’s latest article, “Poor Sarah.”  I will quote it and the end of the post but you can find it here.

If you ever want to see an example of the elitist, snooty, out of touch reasoning of liberal democrats that republicans are so fond of labeling all democrats as, then you don’t have to go any farther than Judith Warner’s article.  Although a jaded mind may think that all articles from the NY Times are dripping with elitist, snooty, out of touch reasoning, I think Judith Warner’s piece takes the cake and then buys the bakery after.

Judith Warner’s article can boil down to pretty much three things.  Number 1:  Sarah Palin is like Elle Woods, the heroine in Legally Blonde.  Number 2:  Anyone who supports Sarah Palin, and particularly any woman who supports Sarah Palin, mistakenly sympathizes with Sarah Palin, much like a prisoner would in a Stockholm Syndrome type of situation.  Number 3:  And, anyone who supports Sarah Palin is an idiot, because Sarah Palin is both “incompetent” and an “insult” to every man and woman alive in America, and perhaps the rest of the world.

Warner’s article speaks for itself but I thought I’d spend a few lines with my comments.  Judith Warner’s article is an example of the shroud of ignorance that many democrats are still living in — even after the second George Bush win.  I’m sorry to break it to Judith, and perhaps to some liberal democrats who are laughing to themselves over a cup of latte and a scone (pronounced skahn, not scone), but not every women has been duped into supporting Palin for the wrong reasons (such as sympathy), and not every woman who was born on this earth — by both God given mental faculties and reason — is born a liberal democrat with liberal values. 

Warner doesn’t admit this in her article, but let’s put it this way: if Sarah Palin was fat and ugly, would she be compared to Elle Woods or some other type of ditz?  I’m not a woman, nor have I ever in this lifetime been a woman, but when Judith Warner wrote this article, is she reliving her high school memories of the pretty and popular “girl” who beat her in school elections and won the prom queen?  On a more fundamental and primal level, Warner’s article just sounds bitter against her because, well, Palin is where she is and Judith, is, well, where she is.

Apart from that, Warner’s article represents the view that liberal democrats are right and that anyone who disagrees with that view is simply stupid, backward, and idiotic.  It’s different than saying someone is wrong for supporting McCain/Palin.  There is a fine line between saying someone is wrong versus saying someone is stupid, backward, and idiotic.  Not only does the latter resort to ad hominum attacks which do nothing to actually create constructive dialogue, it’s just simply so, so, well, as Elle Woods might say, “so, oh my god, like that’s so high school.”

Here’s the article from the NY Times:

I spent the past week in New York, helping my mother recover from surgery. It was a new role for me, taking care of my mom. It must, I think, have been somewhat destabilizing. Perhaps when previously untapped wells of care-for-others are accessed, there’s no stopping the flow. Or perhaps it was just that, after five days locked in stare-downs with my mother’s cat, my eyes were playing tricks on me.

This may explain why, on Tuesday afternoon when I went to The Times Web site and saw the photo of Sarah Palin with Henry Kissinger, a funny thing happened. A wave of self-recognition and sympathy washed over me. That’s right — self-recognition and sympathy.Rising up from a source deep in my subconscious. I saw a woman fully aware that she was out of her league, scared out of her wits, hanging on for dear life. I saw this in the sag of her back in her serious black suit, in the position of her hands, crossed modestly atop her knees, and in that “Mad Men”-era updo, ever unchanging, like a good luck charm.  Why, all of a sudden, was I experiencing this upsurge of concern and kinship? I knew, on the one hand, that this new vision of Palin had to be a mirage. Only a few hours earlier, I’d nodded along knowingly as a band of old-school liberals, gathered in my mother’s apartment to cheer her through her convalescence, tore the Alaska governor apart.

“He’s probably the first Jew she’s ever met,” one older gentleman, who himself had grown up as one of the only Jews in pre-World-War-II Lincoln, Neb., said of her meeting with Kissinger.  “No, there was Joe Lieberman,” his wife reminded him, putting me in a mind of the comedian Sara Benincasa’s utterly hilarious Palin parody, as a chorus of “despicable” and “disgusting” filled the room. My friend Mary has long said that I have a tendency to develop a Stockholm-Syndrome-like empathy for the people I write about. But I don’t think that’s what was going on here. I think — before I blinked — I had an actual flash of insight. I think I finally stumbled upon a major piece of the puzzle of how it is that so many Republican women can so passionately claim that Sarah Palin is someone they relate to. (It’s worth noting that polls have definitively shown that John McCain’s Palin gambit has not paid off in attracting disgruntled Democratic women voters.)

That the women who agree with Palin would also like her is not surprising. But the whole business of relating? That has remained mysterious for me. What, I’ve wondered, could the kinds of suburban moms I met, for example, at the McCain-Palin rally in Virginia, some of them former professionals with just two children apiece, one a former grad student making links between Palintology and the work of Homi Bhabha, have in common with a moose-killing Alaska frontierswoman with her five kids, five colleges and pastoral protection from witchcraft?  I think I’ve seen it now. In her own folded hands, her hopeful, yet sinking posture, her eager-to-please look. Sarah Palin is their — dare I say our? — inner Elle Woods.

I had thought of Elle Woods, the heroine of the 2001 and 2003 “Legally Blonde” and “Legally Blonde 2” films, a great deal during the week that Palin became McCain’s running mate and made her appearance at the Republican National Convention. The thoughts didn’t actually originate with Palin; my daughter Julia had recently discovered the soundtrack of “Legally Blonde: the Musical” and then the movies that inspired the Broadway show.  Re-watching the movies with Julia, I’d been surprised at how time, and motherhood, had tempered my affection for Elle Woods — a frilly, frothy blonde who charms her way into Harvard Law School and takes the stodgy intellectual elitists there by storm with her Anygirl decency and non-snooty (and not-so-credible) native intelligence.

I’d found the “Legally Blonde” movies fun the first time around. Viewing them in the company of an enraptured 11-year-old, who’d declared Elle her new “role model” after months of dreaming of growing up to be a neuroscientist in a long braid and Birkenstocks, was another story. “You can’t,” I’d admonished Julia, “accomplish anything worthwhile in life just by being pretty and cute and clever. You have to do the work.” “It’s just fun, Mom,” she protested. Right. You don’t have to be perennially pretty in pink — and ditsy and cutesy and kinda maybe stupid — to have an inner Elle Woods. Many women do. I think of Elle every time I dress up my insecurities in a nice suit. So many of us today — balancing work and family, treading water financially — feel as if we’re in over our heads, getting by on appearances while quaking inside in anticipation of utter failure. Chick lit — think of Bridget Jones, always fumbling, never quite who she should be — and in particular the newer subgenre of mom lit are filled with this kind of sentiment.

You don’t have to be female to suffer from Impostor Syndrome either — I learned the phrase only recently from a male friend, who puts a darned good face forward. But I think that women today — and perhaps in particular those who once thought they could not only do it all but do it perfectly, with virtuosity — are unique in the extent to which they bond over their sense of imposture. I saw this feeling in Palin — in a flash, on that blue couch, catty-corner to Kissinger, as her eyes pleaded for clemency from the camera. I’ll bet you anything that her admirers — the ones whose hearts really and truly swell with a sense of kinship to her — see or sense it in her, too. They know she can’t possibly do it all — the kids, the special-needs baby, the big job, the big conversations with foreign leaders. And neither could they.

The “Legally Blonde” fairy tales spin around the idea that, because Elle believes in herself, she can do anything. Never mind the steps that she skips. Never mind the fact that — in the rarefied realms of Harvard Law and Washington policymaking — she isn’t the intellectual equal of her peers. Self-confidence conquers all! (“Of course she doesn’t have that,” said Laura Bush of Palin this week when asked if the vice presidential pick had sufficient foreign policy experience. “You know, that’s not been her role. But I think she is a very quick study.”) Real life is different, of course, from Hollywood fantasy. Incompetence has consequences, political and personal. Glorifying or glamorizing the sense of just not being up to the tasks of life has consequences, too. It means that any woman who exudes competence will necessarily be excluded from the circle of sisterhood. We can’t afford any more of that.

Frankly, I’ve come to think, post-Kissinger, post-Katie-Couric, that Palin’s nomination isn’t just an insult to the women (and men) of America. It’s an act of cruelty toward her as well.

Is Barack Obama the Anti-Christ?

Is Barack Obama the Anti-Christ?

When I first heard that question, I had to ask myself whether this was some kind of joke spread by a fundamentalist nutjob living in a basement full of the first-edition copies of the “Left Behind” series. It did not take long for me to realize that the question of whether Barack Obama is the anti-christ is a fully-fledged and debated topic for those who are bent on spreading the theory: certain evangelicals and christian conservatives. In a previous post, you may have seen how republicans, either by implicit agreement or straight out proclamation, have claimed that somehow God is on the side of John McCain and that anyone who doesn’t vote for John McCain is anti-christian.

The whole thing is rather scary — the reasoning that is. When you look at the “barack-obama-is-the-anti-christ-theory,” it is based on facts that are just patently untrue, most notably the claim that Obama is a Muslim. People actually believe in their heart of hearts that Obama is the anti-christ.  For his part, McCain hasn’t gone out and proclaimed, “Obama is the anti-christ!”, but at the same time, he hasn’t done anything to ease the flames of the right’s scare tactics that Obama is the anti-christ. McCain is certainly aware of fear tactics . . . he uses them anytime and anywhere he can (see Republican Convention).  After all, you may have seen a commercial last month from McCain that echoed many of the images and messages of the “Left Behind” series.  In the end, McCain is profiting from the mistruths that certain portions of the conservative right are spreading.

As I have previously mentioned in prior posts, the democrats should not underestimate these claims from the right. Yes, the claim that Barack Obama is the anti-christ is patently absurd — but it is a patently absurd belief that millions of Americans believe. Whether it is their racism by another name or just plain stupidity is really of no consequence in the end — the fact is they believe that Obama is the anti-christ in their heart of hearts and will vote for McCain.  Another four years of Bush and just general stupidity (see McCain’s interview on radio caracol on September 17, 2008) is something I think most Americans could do without.

The anti-christ claim is both an indictment on the clear racism that some portions of our society have against Obama as well as a call to action for Obama to start getting down and dirty and calling McCain out. It is clear that McCain and company have taken their gloves off; it’s time Obama and company to start doing the same.

Here’s an example of an email I received about Barack Obama being the anti-christ:

This will make you re-think : A Trivia question in Sunday School: How long is the beast allowed to have authority in Revelations? Guess the Answer? Revelations Chapter 13 tells us it is 42 months, and you know what that is. Almost a four year term to a Presidency. All I can say is Lord,  Have Mercy on us!!!!!! According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ is: The anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal….the  prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is it OBAMA?? I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to post this as many times as you can! Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media outlet…do it!  I refuse to take a chance on this unknown candidate who came out of nowhere. GOD BLESS AMERICA

John McCain, the Republicans, and the Diseased Elephant in the Room

If I had to sum up the message from the Republican Convention, then I would sum it up like this:  the Republicans — unlike those Democrats — do not represent the elite, are first and foremost for the country, believe in smaller government and less taxes, support less spending, and were not the party of President George W. Bush.  

I wish I had known this before.  This makes my decision so much easier after learning these facts, particularly the one about President George W. Bush not being part of the Republican Party.  Whew. 

I also didn’t realize that democrats represented the elite and that the republicans represented the poor man.  I guess it makes sense, then, that the republicans want more tax cuts for corporations and the uber-rich.  Why should the middle-class get tax cuts?  Everyone knows that if you give tax cuts to corporations, especially those corporations who export U.S. jobs to foreign countries, and to people who make over $250,000 a year, then eventually the benefits of those tax cuts will trickle down to the middle-class.  After all, this trickle down type of economic policy has been working like a charm in the last eight years.  We should keep doing that!!  I mean, it’s not like we have a big deficit, our unemployment rate has not increased, and we have a very robust housing market with minimal foreclosures.  And, just take a look at our rising stock and bond markets.  Anyone who says we’re not better off than we were eight years ago has their heads in the sand!  If you don’t believe me, just look at your 401(K) statements! 

I also didn’t realize that republicans are the party whose primary interest is the U-nited States of America, as opposed to the democrats, who, as I now realize, are probably aligned with terrorists, such as Al-Queda.  I now know that those country-hating democrats are against the torture of terrorists, extraordinary rendition, and anything else that would give ‘due process’ to anyone, citizen or not, who is suspected of terrorism.  It’s not like our country was founded upon the principle of ‘due process’!  I think that term was invented by judges, all of whom are just trying to legislate from the bench.  I also didn’t realize that republicans are the party that want to reduce the size of government.  This is good news, because our president for the last eight years has increased it.  It just keeps getting better for the republicans!  

I guess it’s a good thing that President George W. Bush is not from the Republican party.  When I watched the convention on television, he wasn’t even there and those Republicans didn’t even mention his name.  I don’t even get what those Obama commercials are saying that McCain and President George W. Bush are the “same.”  That’s just ridiculous.  They are not even from the same party!  And, as everyone surely must know, the Republicans have absolutely nothing to do with keeping that President George W. Bush in office the last eight years. 

Wow.  What an epiphany.  You know where my vote is going come November!

USA!  USA!  USA!  USA!  USA!

The Problem With Democrats

I think the biggest problem with democrats can be boiled down to one word that the republicans say we don’t have:  faith.  Believe it or not, democrats have too much faith.

When George Bush ran in 2000, democrats exalted, “How can anyone vote for a man like this?”  Then, in 2004, when George Bush ran again, democrats again exalted, “Well, 2000 was clearly a fluke.  After all, how can anyone vote for a man like this?”  Now, in 2008, the same question is being asked of McCain:  How can anyone vote for a man like this?”

Maybe I’m using a more neutral term like “faith” to describe the democrat’s malady because I am a democrat, unlike other words I could have used, such as “arrogance” or “ignorance” or even “out of touch” to perhaps describe what really is going on with democrats.  Be that as it may, I can say confidently now that a large percentage of Americans will vote for McCain.  For many democrats, that’s a hard thing to admit, because we believe that anyone in their right mind would not vote for such a man.

I’ll take a small example of our “faith” at work.  When democrats are interviewed about Sarah Palin, they often comment that although they are happy that McCain “chose a woman,” they are “offended” that McCain and “those republicans” chose “that kind of woman.”  You mean a woman that is against abortion?  You mean a woman with conservative values?  You mean a woman who has several kids, including one that obviously engaged in pre-marital sex?  

Are these “values” only reserved for men?  Or, for democrats, does every woman have to support abortion rights whole-heartedly and have liberal values to be a reasonable person?

To me, it’s the same old, same old again by the democrats, of framing in our minds that the only things which are at all reasonable are coming from the mouths of Obama and Biden, and that everything which is at all unreasonable is coming from the mouths of McCain and Palin.  That’s a great view at a rally, but not one that will either guide policy or win the election come November.  Unlike in Europe, where political parties can be extraordinarily far apart in terms of ideology, the difference between democrats and republicans — sorry to break it to you again, my democrats — is not so significant.  In that regard, when we democrats take the no-holds-barred-everyone-but-Obama-is-unreasonable-and-ignorant, we are setting ourselves up for failure and disappointment.

Of course, democrats are humans, and we have good defense mechanisms to prevent us from realizing the reality of the situation.  We blamed Florida.  We blamed Ohio.  We blamed Jed Bush.  We blamed the U.S. Supreme Court.  We blamed the evangelicals.  We blamed the red states.  We blamed everyone except ourselves.

The fact is that then, we didn’t have a strong platform of ideas and values that were accessible by the majority of America . . . because we didn’t listen to what our country was saying.  We casted people that disagreed with us aside — the very people that we needed to win an election and take back our country.

Are we listening now?  Or is it going to be the same old song and dance?

Top Five Running Mates For Barack Obama (Other Than Hillary Clinton)

With Barack Obama finally wrapping up the presidential nomination for the Democrats, pundits and experts alike are rushing to proclaim who might get the nod for Vice-President.  A good vice-presidential pick, according to Chris Bowers from openleft.com, should “reinforce[ ] his strengths, not one who balances out his perceived weakness.”

With that in mind, the first name that obviously emerges as the top VP pick is none other than Hillary Clinton.  I don’t know whether this is just a knee-jerk reaction because she was so close to picking up the nomination herself, or the fact that Obama and Clinton monopolized the political landscape for the last several months so that no one can think of anyone other than Clinton. 

Either way, the lack of any creative thought is a sad reality for the Democrats and for Barack Obama.  But once the “Go Hillary Go” dust settles, many viable Vice Presidential candidates will remain.  This is not to say that Hillary Clinton is not a good Vice Presidential pick (she certainly is but don’t ask me why).  Rather, the democrats have to realize that there are viable and meritorious Vice Presidential candidates out there who can galvanize the electoral base and support Barack Obama other than just Hillary Clinton.  To that end, here is my list of the top-five running mates for Barack Obama.  I have analyzed several data sources, spoken with numerous people, and consulted various indices both in the U.S. and abroad.

1)  Zohan:  Zohan, a former Isreali assassin and now a hairdresser, is just the kind of “action-man” Obama needs to support the rhetoric in his speeches. After all, Obama is really good with words and rousing arenas with awesome one-liners, but no one knows whether he can actually do what he says he is going to do.  With Zohan by his side, voters really won’t care.  Zohan can fill in the Obama “action” gap with his quick wit and proven record of hits.  Zohan will also erase any doubt that Barack is not a friend of Isreal.  Finally, Zohan’s profession as a hairdresser is just the kind of dichotomy the democrats need.  The assassin part will sway blue dog democrats and libertarians to vote for an Obama/Zohan ticket, and the hairdresser part will sway those democrats who want to vote for Ralph Nader.

2) Ronald McDonald:  What Obama lacks in age and experience, Ronald McDonald can make up for it with his ageless, international charm. We cannot overlook the fact that Ronald McDonald is fluent in approximately 31 languages, which will dampen any criticisms that Obama lacks foreign policy experience.  Further, McDonald has corporate connections as the CHO (Chief Happiness Officer) for the megacorporation, McDonalds.  This will certainly allay any fears that Obama is a “corporate hater” or “business hater” or “socialist.”  Ronald McDonald’s corporate upbringing, coupled with his generosity, compassion, and color coordination, will help tip on-the-fence republicans and conservative democrats towards an Obama/Mcdonald ticket.

3) Sir Alexander Ferguson: Sir Alexander Ferguson’s record as the greatest football coach in English Football — and perhaps the greatest football coach in the world — is just the kind of “aged star quality” that Obama needs to counteract his own “young star quality.”  Sir Ferguson has solid, no-nonsense managerial experience running such teams as top ranked Manchester United.  Of course, if Sir Ferguson can manage his football teams so well, then imagine what he could do with a country?  Who else had the foresight and shrewdness to sign Cristiano Ronaldo when he was 19 years old?  That’s exactly the kind of message that an Obama/Ferguson ticket will have.  Ferguson has a proven track record of making the right choices during difficult times and when it mattered the most.  This is something that Obama hasn’t shown.  But by having Ferguson on his ticket, voters will forget that Obama has no track record.

4) Min Behadur Sherchan:  At 77 years old, Sherchan is the oldest person on record to climb the formidable Mt. Everest. John McCain may be 71 years young, but can McCain climb Mt. Everest?  I don’t think so.  And that’s exactly the kind of weakness that Obama needs to ruthlessly exploit by having Sherchan on his ticket.  With such a monumentous achievement as climbing Mt. Everest, it truly doesn’t matter what else Sherchan has done or what he believes in or what his economic policies are or even what his views are on the Iraq War.  It all doesn’t matter.  Sherchan can rest on his laurels.  What is there left to do after climbing Mt. Everest?  Nothing, except to run for Vice President with Barack Obama.

5) Chewbacca:  As a towering Wookie, Chewbacca has exactly the kind of presence that Obama so desperately needs to win the general election.  He has the physical stature to deflect any claims against Obama of being weak on terror or on crime or on unions — issues that usually kill the democrats in a general election.  Chewbacca is a certifiable badass. He also has the international stature to deflect any claims against Obama as lacking foreign policy experience.  It goes without saying that Chewbacca has experience in other universes, a fact that even McCain cannot dispute, as well as language skill.  Chewbacca is also a certifiable wingman and will be a loyal vice president.  Voters will know that he has no aims to be the president or some ulterior motive to control the president, as many know Hillary will want to do if she gets the VP nod.  Finally, Chewbacca can only help Obama with his rhetorical jibberjab to confuse and bewilder voters into voting for an Obama/Chewbacca ticket.  As we all know, the famed “Chewbacca defense” was no accident, and it something that Obama has mastered.  Why not have the person-practice that Obama mastered on his very own ticket?

In the end, the choice of VP will be an important decision for Obama.  Only time will tell if Obama has made the right pick.

The Top Five Running Mates for John McCain

Unless you’ve been living in a shoebox, the press has been in full force trying to predict who John McCain will choose as his running mate. It seems that the top “predictions” so far are (in no particular order): Tim Pawlenty, Charlie Crist, Mitt Romney, Mark Sanford, Tom Ridge, Mike Huckabee, Rob Portman and Condi Rice.  I’m not going to spend this post here analyzing these top press “predictions.”  Instead, I will make my own predictions on who the Top Five best running mates for John McCain should be.

The choice of running mate is viewed by many pundits as extremely important for McCain.  As the New York Times remarked yesterday, “The choice of a running mate is always important, but it may be particularly so in Mr. McCain’s case, given that, at 71, he is seeking to become the oldest candidate ever elected to a first term as president.”  I have taken this piece of advice from the New York Times to heart when I formulated my Top Five List.  After hours of exhaustive research and an analysis of several key data indices, I arrived with this:

Mr. Cheeseburger 9000’s Top Five Running Mates for John McCain

1) Zakk Wylde: As you all know, Zakk Wylde is a bad ass guitarist, known for his virtuoso skills, such as speed picking and blazing up and down a pentatonic scale like there’s no tomorrow on his custom Les Pauls.  He is a guitarist for the one and only Ozzy Osbourne and also the lead singer and guitarist for Black Label Society. 

Mr. Wylde, depending on who you ask, is either 38 years old or 41 years old.  Whatever the discrepancy, it makes no difference.  zakk.jpgMr. Wylde will bring youthful energy to his campaign and have the ability to draw large crowds.  He will vitalize the soccer moms and the NASCAR dads with his long hair, big beard, muscular arms and a “take no prisoners” attitude.  This is just what McCain needs to solidify his base and to steal votes from the Democrats.  And that whole thing about “alienating” conservatives.  Well, McCain doesn’t have to worry.  Who are the conservatives going to vote for, anyway?  Hillary Clinton? Obama?    

2) Cristiano Ronaldo:  Cristiano Ronaldo is easily one of the top five soccer players in the world right now.  He plays for the always entertaining Manchester United and the Portuguese National Team.

At only 23 years old, Mr. Ronaldo will bring massive youth and energy to McCain’s campaign.  ronaldo.jpgHe is a certified star in one of the world’s most popular sports and that fact should not be overlooked.  Further, it can’t be ignored that Mr. Ronaldo was not hit with the ugly stick, so he will likely galvanize the entire female population of the United States to vote for a McCain/Ronaldo ticket.  Some of you may be asking, “Well, Mr. Ronaldo wasn’t born in the U.S., so he can’t run.”  Well, I say, neither was John McCain, but that’s not stopping him, right?

3) Beyonce Knowles:  Okay, if you don’t know who Beyonce Knowles is, then what do you really know?  And that’s precisely the point and underlying message of why Beyonce should be McCain’s running mate.  She’s young and talented.  She has a good business sense.  She’s connected to many important people in the R & B and Hip-Hop industry. 

The press has spurned all this talk about having Condi Rice as the running mate, as Rice is “female,” “a minority,” and “has a high position in government.”  beyonce.jpgBut let’s take a closer look at Beyonce.  Beyonce, like Condi, is “female” and “a minority,” and most importantly, unlike Condi, Beyonce “has a high position in the music industry.”  She was also born in Texas, so Beyonce has a southern connection.  While it is true that Beyonce was not the Secretary of State, Beyonce does not have the baggage that goes along with having that kind of position or responsibility. In the end, there really is no difference between Beyonce and Condi except that Ms. Knowles can galvanize the entire male population to vote for McCain and she can sing and design clothes well, too.  These facts tip in the balance of Beyonce for Vice-President.

4) Tomoji Tanabe:  At 112 years old, Mr. Tanabe, a former civil engineer, is the world’s oldest living person.  He currently lives in Japan, because, well, he is Japanese.  Mr. Tanabe will certainly be an asset for Mr. McCain for two main reasons.  First, his very age will make McCain look like a teenager.  tanabe.jpgA large percentage of Americans, who are so full of sugar and the Fox News Channel, will not even realize that McCain is so old when he stands next to Mr. Tanabe.  Second, Mr. Tanabe will galvanize McCain’s mysterious and often times elusive “conservative base.”  Mr. Tanabe neither drinks nor smokes and thus these “social values” will relate well to conservatives, particularly the ones that want the government to build a huge electrically-charged wall/fence separating the U-nited states from Mexico.  After all, everyone knows that only Democrats drink and smoke.  And, finally, even though Mr. Tanabe was not born in the United States, neither was John McCain. 

5)  Simba:  For all of you who don’t know, Simba is the King of the Pride Lands.  Two full-length documentaries of his rise from cub to King Lion were captured in the critically acclaimed “The Lion King” and “The Lion King 2:  Simba’s Pride.”  simba.jpgCertainly, Simba’s legendary status can only help McCain’s bid for the President.  Simba has strength.  Simba has virility.  Simba is a leader.  All these are qualities that McCain must associate himself with.  He can do that easily with Simba by his side.  Moreover, everyone, from liberals to conservatives, would be comfortable with Simba running the U.S., since he did an extremely good job with the Pride Lands.  And, he’s a Lion, which everyone knows has a wide support base.