Choosing a Candidate (orig. posted 10/26/2008)

In line with items in tow for purchase, I smiled at the plain, yet lovely blonde cashier in her mid 40's and dropped the goods on the belt. She smiled back and asked if I had found everything I was looking for. I was surprised by the question, having previously been asked that only at Trader Joe's in Wilmington, but pressed on with an honest answer: "No, I wasn't able to. I was unable to find a vice-presidential candidate." Then, I remembered, ah-ha!, I was shopping at Target and not Wal-Mart. "I apologize. Wrong store," I said. The woman, perhaps interested in me a moment ago, shook her head, mentally chalked me up as a nut, and completed the transaction by tentatively, yet politely wishing me a nice day.

For the reader perplexed by this dialogue, I can do no better than to quote an Associated Press story dated October 18: "Clad in a green kilt and knee socks and wearing a READ MY LIPSTICK button, Ephrata resident Brett Gilbert, 56, called (Sarah) Palin "my kind of person" in part because she's a hunter and has a child in the military. "She's real," said Gilbert, a vehicle damage appraiser. "I mean, the other day, she had to stop at Wal-Mart and buy diapers."

(No, I am not making this s--- up, at least not the second paragraph.)

I soldiered on in my search for a proper vice-presidential candidate and went to a local Wal-Mart. I lurked in their sporting goods section, waiting for someone to buy hunting accessories. A few people did, and I followed them throughout the store, waiting for one of them to pick up diapers as well. If they had, I would have asked them if they had a child in the military and, if so, would have asked them why they were not running for national office, since they obviously had all the necessary qualifications. Unfortunately, after a few days of stalking various Wal-Marts, I abandoned my efforts.

An absurd effort on my part, perhaps, but not as absurd as the reasons some people give for casting their votes. It's become a cliche, but people really have been quoted as saying that they voted for President Bush (as opposed to Kerry) because he's the type of guy you could have a beer with. Of course, President Bush's Administration has overseen the biggest economic disaster since the Great Depression, the biggest foreign policy disaster in American history, plus 9/11, and the least empathetic response to a humanitarian disaster in our history. No news on whether Bush had a beer with those widowed, displaced, or unemployed as a result of his decisions. A McCain Administration promises more of the same but, hey, he and that Sarah babe are "real Americans," whatever that means. The more complex the times get, the more of an emotional need many people have for the "plain talk" McCain and Palin (Palin=plain is an anagram, BTW) offer that they can understand.

(Of course, on the opposite end of the spectrum, people who vote for a candidate because of an abstract notion of change without being able to articulate any specifics should also be censured.)

Mr. Gilbert, you look for someone who speaks to your level, as if insinuating that you, too, could be president. I'll opt for the candidate who's the smartest, the most specific in his ideas, and the most utilitarian. I mean, Ralph Nader.