Friday, October 10, 2008

Picking a VP candidate

I have been watching Presidential elections for a long time, and have been always fascinated by the drama, the pageantry and the utter hypocrisy. This election has really demonstrated the last.

I have been long convinced that the present administration does not consist of a President, a Vice-President and assorted counselors, aides, assistants and various other hanger-on’s and spear carriers. Instead, the real administration consists of a shadowy cabal, a small group of power brokers who meet in a smoky back room and make all the decisions necessary to advance their agenda. I think this same group selected our current President. Eight years ago, they got together and asked each other: “Who do we have that we can get elected and then control?” Presto, like magic we got George W. Four years later, they came up with enough dirty tricks to assure his re-election.

This year, the group had a candidate who was struggling. They knew that even if their candidate was elected, they would not be able to totally control him, so they went to plan B: select a Vice-Presidential candidate who will help get him elected, and who they could control.

The group convened over cocktails and cigars, and embarked on a high-level group-think session. After much group groping around, they finally came up with three firm requirements for their ideal candidate:
(1)There were a lot of disgruntled Hillary supporters out there, so their candidate must be female, in order to capture those votes;
(2)There were a lot of National Rifle Association votes out there in the wilderness, so their candidate should also be a hunter;
(3)There were a lot of the religious right votes just looking for a place to land, so their candidate needed to have, at least, the sheen of religiosity.

They ran the numbers, and lo and behold! Up came the name of Sarah.

If the reader thinks I am overly cynical, then I ask: Can you come up with another logical explanation for this?

No comments: