Cabbage for President

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, once wrote that most people would vote for a head of cabbage if it was nominated by their party. For a very long time, I assumed this was an exagerration. Now I've come to realize that while the statement is mostly untrue, a head of cabbage with the words "change" and "hope" written on it is another story entirely. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Barrack Hussein Obama.

Think about this for a second; the proverbial head of lettuce has no experience, no revolutionary ideas, and no evidence of any other kind that it will make a good president. Politically speaking, it is totally without substance. The only thing the cabbage has going for it is that its a liberal head of cabbage, therefore acting as a physical representation of liberalism itself. And of course there is that little matter of change and hope, I meanwho doesn't want a bit of hope and change. Can you hear them, the crowds of people chanting "cabbage?" Can you see the crowds coming out to see this brave yet small new leader? Can you imagine the greif that would sweep trough the country after what could have been the greatest president in American history was assassinated by a rabbit?

Now compare this image to Obama. Obama is shown to have avoided controversial issues in the past, he has virtually no experience in foreign affairs (which is the most important issue today regardless of how much attention is paid to it), and his platform is hope. Obama makes great speeches about how we can change but he doesn't speak very much about how we are actually supposed to do it or what we need to change.

So far, Obama's power to attract followers has been based largely on his charisma, his message of "hope", and the fact that he is a Democrat. Therefor, like the cabbage, Obama;s main support comes from being a symbol. Of course, there is nothing wrong with hope as long as there is a means to achieve and there is nothing wrong with change as long as it is in the right direction but is there really any evidence of either neccesary details?

Take, for example, the prayer that was (with Obama's permission) leaked to the press. The actual context of the prayer was about as basic as it gets, asking God (if by "God" you mean the media) to "protect [Obama's] family and [Obama]" and went on to ask for forgiveness, guidance, and for God to make him "an instument of your will." The whole stunt did nothing to clarify Obama's policies or ideas, all it did was "show" that he was a generally good person.

Yet despite those healthy-looking leaves on the outside--hope, decency, and change--this cabbage may have a rotten core. Everyone has heard about the preaching of Jeremiah Wright, Obama's racist and anti-American pastor but has the media ever truly challenged Obama on the issue? Has anyone ever asked him why it took twenty years for him to leave--and to those who have no experience with churches, there are quite a lot of them and if you don't like what a pastor has to say, you just leave--but it only took Oprah two year to leave the so-called church? What about all of Obama's other radical backers, such as Rev. Eric Lee, who echoed the age-old ant-Semitic conspiracy theories at the fortieth aniversarry of Martin Luther King's assassination? How often have they even been mentioned? And lets not forget Obama's support of the "Fairness Doctrine" a law that if passed could put an end to the few media outlets that do question Obama.

Democracy has always been a sort of social experiment. Can human beings really handle freedom or is it inevitable that we will surrender our personal liberties to some great deceiver? While I won't accuse Obama of being a communist, the point is still relevant. If we will blindly hand the reigns of power over to him, then who is to say we won't do the same for a modern Caesar? Will we elect the head of cabbage, or will we toss it into the compost heap where it belongs?