Choosing the Form of the Destructor

Barack Obama’s press corps groupies are all atwitter these days as they follow him breathlessly on his around-the-world journey to discover where Iraq is. On the Republican side, talk show hosts like Sean Hannity are working desperately to convince the voters (and themselves) that McCain really is a conservative deep down, where it matters, most of the time, pretty much, anyway. Although they back different horses, both camps agree that this is the most consequential presidential election of our time – or at least the most consequential election since the last one.

As I watch the current media frenzy, I can’t help but be reminded of the movie Ghostbusters. In the final battle, Gozer tells the team to “choose the form of the Destructor.” That is, to determine the form the Sumerian god Zuul will take as he destroys the planet. Terrified, Dan Aykroyd’s character visualizes the most harmless thing he can imagine, the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man. Sure enough, Zuul appears on the streets of New York as a giant marshmallow, crushing cars and toppling buildings like a fluffy white Godzilla.

That seems to be the extent of our “choice” these days when it comes to Republicans and Democrats. Do we want the Destructor to take the form of Barack Obama or John McCain? Even if the voter believes McCain is a giant Slor and Obama is the soft and cuddly Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man (or vice-versa), the result will be the same – a further erosion of individual liberty and free enterprise in the United States.

Perhaps you think Obama is the better choice because he will get us out of Iraq sooner. That may be true, although what was previously touted as an immediate withdrawal under an Obama presidency morphed to “within sixteen months.” Then it became “as soon as possible.” At this rate, Obama may be the one saying we’ll be in Iraq for another fifty or one hundred years.

But aside from Obama’s ever-slipping timetable for withdrawal, what substantive foreign policy differences does he have with McCain? He has said that he would be more diplomatic and would work with our allies, of course. That will no doubt do wonders for our allies’ self-esteem, like that first Thanksgiving when you were promoted from the kiddie table to sit with the grownups, but it’s not exactly a top-to-bottom critical analysis of US foreign policy. And given the Democrats’ willingness to subjugate the American military to UN command, who’s to say that he wouldn’t march the troops out of Baghdad and straight into Darfur?

Or maybe you think that the fate of the Republic can only be assured with a McCain presidency because he’ll nominate strict constructionists to the Supreme Court. Anything’s possible, I suppose, but consider this – McCain’s great legislative “achievement” is the blatantly unconstitutional attack on free speech known as McCain-Feingold. Why would McCain nominate justices inclined to strike down his pride and joy?

As far as economic policy is concerned, there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two. And if they actually follow through on their threats to micro-manage the economy, there won’t be a dime’s worth left in a dime either. Both candidates agree that when the national budget is over $3 trillion per year, the national debt is roughly $10 trillion and climbing, and unfunded liabilities range between $50-$100 trillion, the obvious course of action is to promise more benefits and grow the government even further.

Such is the choice before us – McCain or Obama? Choose the form of the Destructor – Giant Slor or Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man? And don’t bother looking at any third-party candidates that might try to reduce rather than enlarge the scope of government. You wouldn't want to “waste your vote,” would you?