…Or so some particularly brain-dead Republicans would have us believe. Three times now I’ve heard GOP functionaries blather on about how Governor Palin is a solid pick for the veep slot because she’s been “governor of the largest state”.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Largest state? Oh please. Did elections suddenly stop being about demographics and start being about geography? Demographically, Alaska is not a major player by any stretch of the imagination, unless you’re counting per capita snowmobile ownership or something. Titular governance of sheer land mass hasn’t been significant since feudalism was in vogue. Then again, that’s about the era today’s Republicans would rather we lived in, so I suppose it makes some kind of sense. (I kid, I kid! Republicans actually yearn to return a much more advanced era.)

While watching the Olympics this weekend I was subjected to an ad warning that an Obama Presidency would bring higher unemployment. “Higher taxes, more government spending, so, fewer jobs”, according to the voiceover.

While I understand the logic about higher taxes resulting in fewer jobs (i.e., those poor rich folks are ruthlessly prevented from selflessly creating minimum-wage jobs if they are forced to pay luxury taxes on their yachts), I don’t understand why more government spending would result in fewer jobs; increases in federal spending parlay into more jobs in both the public and private sectors. I mean, seriously, where do you think that money goes if not to salaries and contracts? There’s only so much surplus cheese lying around, after all.

Still, looking at the bigger picture, we can clearly see that all these latter-day, New Deal-hatin’ conservatives are clearly the only ones who can save us from runaway government spendi—

Or, you know, not.

I don’t know about you but I’m pretty tired of Beijing’s prediliction for throwing little hissy fits whenever anybody calls them out on their bullshit. President Bush recently voiced a respectfully muted opposition to the Communist government’s authoritarian practices, and what was the Communist response to the President’s politely-worded disapproval? “How dare you meddle in our internal affairs, foreign devils.”

What a crock of shit.

Guess what, jerks: you want to be a world power and roll with the big boys? You gotta be able to take criticism now and then without crying like a little girl about how everybody is all up in your face. This is not an incitement of counterrevolution in China, it’s our frank statement of opinion. We have aired a point of philosophical contention like grown-ups are supposed to. This sort of insecurity does not bode well for regional or global security, to say nothing of the overall well-being of your people. In short: Hey China, grow a fucking pair, will you? Thanks.

Remember when Rupert Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal and made some nondescript noise about maintaining its journalistic integrity? If you’re still buying the lie that he wouldn’t simply turn the respected, conservative Journal into another innuendo-spewing tabloid, you might wish to consider this recent WSJ negative puff piece (which was then dutifully echoed by Fox News as if it were actually worthy of repeating).

I don’t know what’s worse: that Murdoch is subverting the Wall Street Journal to peddle this sort of stupid crap, or that his conservative smear machine is so fucking predictable that The Onion had already beat him to the punch.

I’ll just come out and say it: I’m for Obama. Why? For change. For inspirational leadership, instead of selecting yet another center-left apparatchik or center-right corporate tool. America needs a breath of fresh air, which neither McCain nor Clinton can provide.

Clinton’s supporters extol her “experience” and “electability” as the qualities which, they say, make her a superior candidate. Neither cut any ice with me. “Experience”? It just means she’s spent more time running with the herd of gelded Democrats who’ve helped get us into the mess we’re in now. A slightly less timorous wonk. Someone who’s been part of the problem. Dubya had a cabinet stuffed to the gills with experience, arguably one of the most experienced ever, and look where that got us.

And “Electability”? At best, the Clinton camp means that she’s the only candidate who’s tough and smart enough to withstand the slings and arrows that will be hurled by the GOP. At worst, they’re whispering that ain’t nobody gonna elect no negro to the Oval Office. Both reasons are bosh. Obama is smart enough to spar on the national stage, and no Democrat worth even a fraction of their salt is going to passively take it in the ass after witnessing what happened to Kerry vis à vis the Swift Boaters. As for the race angle, let’s be frank; probably 90% of the folks who would never vote for a black man would never vote for a Democrat, either. The number of rabid Clinton-haters is far greater—and more vocal—than the number of racists.

America does not need another “experienced leader”. America needs an inspiring leader. Neither McCain nor Clinton fit that bill by a long shot. Vote Obama.