Too Much to Ask?

Is it too much to ask that the Republicans field a candidate who can speak in complete sentences and has a rudimentary knowledge of grammar? After eight years of suffering through George W. Bush's mangled syntax and mispronunciations and runon non-sentences, none of which were ever less than cringe-inducing, we now have John McCain. It is painfully apparent from the last debate that McCain did not ace the verbal SATs himself. Who knows, maybe it was the stress of the debate itself which caused McCain to sound so befuddled, maybe he actually sounds like Shakespeare in the privacy of his own house. But he came across like a deer in the headlights -- and a dumb, inarticulate, repetitive one at that -- next to the eloquent, smooth-talking Obama. McCain's goofy grin, worn mostly at inappropriate times, did not help matters either.

Another point. My statistics teacher in business school told us (back in 1983) that in 21 of the previous 22 Presidential elections, the taller candidate won. (By my count, 4 of the next 6 were as well.) Next to the tall, elegant, youthful Obama, McCain looked like a wizened runt. Now, you say, elections shouldn't be decided on such superficialities. And, of course, you're right. They shouldn't be. But they are.

Tall, handsome, and square-jawed Mitt Romney, who is capable of speaking in complete sentences, would have been a far more formidable candidate. But in the primaries he split the conservative vote with Mike Huckabee, another charismatic conservative, so McCain won by plurality. Obama would even have done Romney the favor of removing the "flip-flop" label from him by having changed so many of his own positions during his headlong rush to the center. But perhaps this was a blessing in disguise for Romney. It would have been a near impossibility for a Republican to be elected this year, after these last eight disastrous years. And four years from now, the electorate will be far better acquainted with the real Obama, the one he has so artfully kept hidden, after his post-inaugural rush back to the far left.

Male Hormones and Politics

My son pointed something out to me the other day that had never occurred to me before, but rang true. He said, "The liberals at school, the ones who have long hair and wear Che Guevara t-shirts, are always the wimpiest guys." There does seem to be a correlation between hormones and politics. Guys who stick up for their own race do seem likely to have more testosterone.

After my son's comment, I thought of the guys I've known personally from both sides of the aisle and then sorted them by (at least the superficial appearance of) masculinity, and found a near perfect correlation. Guys of any race who stick up for their own are more likely to be muscular, belligerent, and aggressive, with typically male personalities. Think of the guys you've known whom you've thought of as hyper-androgenized (as opposed to androgynous): did any of them have a political viewpoint which favored others over their own group?

This isn't true of just whites. The blacks who most aggressively demand special privileges and reparations -- think Jesse Jackson, or the Fruit of Islam, or the Black Panthers and all their spiritual descendants -- don't seem to be lacking in male hormones. Blacks who make fun of their own, on the other hand -- think Chris Rock, or Dave Chapelle -- tend to be skinny, even scrawny guys who are less bellicose by nature.

The primaries this year gave us some great examples of each type. Let's make the obvious assumption that among whites, those who stick up for their own tend to lean Republican, and those who don't, Democrat. Look at the contestants in the Republican primary: Fred Thompson, the former actor and basketball star. Mitt Romney, who bears a slight resemblance to Clark Kent. John McCain, former top gun who stuck by his fellow POWs while in captivity. Rudy Giulani, not a physical specimen but a tough former DA with a weakness for the ladies. Mike Huckabee, a big guy who recently ran a marathon. Ron Paul, former state champ at track. Duncan Hunter, the square-jawed former Army Ranger who servied with the 173rd Airborne and participated in 24 helicopter assaults. And Tom Tancredo.

Now let's look at the Democratic field: Hillary Clinton. Chris Dodd. John Edwards. Joe Biden. And Dennis Kucinich. Enough said. (I'm guessing Hillary ranked highest in testosterone.) The other two Democrats, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson, who is Hispanic, fall into a different category: by being Democrats, they are essentially sticking up for their own.

Think of it another way. You're a freshman in college and you've been assigned two roommates, both white. One is a burly football player who loves hunting and ATVing. He likes to drink and has been known to get into fights. The other is a 143 pounder who smokes pot, has lots of friends who are women (who truly are just friends), and looks down on athletes as "Neanderthals." Which one is the Democrat?

Yes, there are exceptions to both rules. But by and large the stereotypes hold.

Whence Obama's Accent?

Listen carefully to Barack Obama, and what you'll hear is a faint southern (whitish) accent, located roughly midway between a northern white (non)accent and a black accent. It's not quite black enough to scare the white electorate, though it does have a tendency to turn several shades darker when he's speaking to an all black audience. But it's not white enough to make him sound like a Tom or an effete Ivy leaguer.

So the question becomes, just where did he acquire this quasi-Southern accent? Did he get it from his Kenyan father, who disappeared from his life when he was two? From his Kansan mother? From his Kansan grandparents, who raised him while his mother went gallivanting around the world? From his schoolchums in Indonesia? Or is that the way they speak at Punahou, the exclusive Hawaiian prep school he attended?

One can't help but suspect that his accent, like everything else about him, was carefully constructed for maximal electoral value.