Manhunt

A Presidential Debate That Will Never Happen

October 01, 2012

View as Single Page
A Presidential Debate That Will Never Happen

Good evening, Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney. I’ll be your moderator tonight. I hope our audience welcomes you with as much warmth as they can manage.

Before I proceed with my questions, you should know a few things about me. I didn’t vote in 2008. I didn’t vote for my current congressman, my current governor, or my current president. In fact, I’ve never voted for any candidate—ever—who won.

And I don’t plan on voting next month. The state I live in will go for Romney, and the county where I live will elect anything that’s black and Democratic, so my ballot won’t make a difference either way. I’m pretty much silenced in the political process.

I realize you feel that it’s within your power to grant me some illusory “right” to complain about all this, but I could bitch until the bloodhounds start barking and it won’t make a dent in the machine that supports both of you.

No one I know—no one—says they feel hopeful about the future. If you’ve taught the American public anything, it’s how to accept feeling powerless without completely losing our minds. I feel as if your entire system depends on a toxic mix of the electorate’s apathy and learned helplessness. And at times I almost feel as if you delight in rubbing our noses in our despair.

Sure, there are many who feel hopeful, but I think all three of us can agree that they’re naïve.

“Good evening, Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney. I’ll be your sole interrogator tonight.”

In politics one ascends to higher office by climbing a golden ladder of lies and evasion, and you two are currently competing for the top rung.

Mr. Obama, you have broken many promises. Mr. Romney, your actions—and even your face itself—reveal someone who lacks an ideological core. So because I don’t trust either one of you, I’ve had you injected with what are deemed to be the most currently reliable truth drugs. You’ve also been wired to polygraph machines and have been given the hand-held lie detectors currently used by the US military. We all know these methods aren’t 100% foolproof, but they may serve as deterrents.

Now for my questions.

The first subject is foreign policy. Islamic terrorism has cost a few thousand American lives over the past dozen years, but ironically not as many American lives as have been lost in our endless wars of retaliation. How would you justify that? Moreover, how does a global network of overseas military bases “defend” us rather than create a worldwide impression that we’re the aggressors? Why does the US seem highly selective when it comes to which corrupt dictatorships they subvert and overthrow? If you’re honestly concerned with national security, why isn’t there a 100-foot wall along our Mexican border and 100,000 armed agents ready to defend it?

There’s been a lot of noise lately about whether or not Iran is developing atomic weapons. But why is there almost total silence regarding whether Israel already has hundreds of atomic weapons? Finally, what does the average American get for supporting Israel beyond death (via terrorism) and taxes (via perpetual wars of conquest)?

Now let’s deal with matters closer to home. If there’s any wealth redistribution to be done, wouldn’t it benefit society more to set up a meritocratic system that subsidizes people with demonstrated potential rather than trying to prop up and placate those who may simply be stupid and lazy? Would you support financial incentives for high-IQ couples to procreate? If not, why not?


Comments