Counting today but minus Election Day (Tuesday, November 4), this endless presidential campaign will be over in just 8-more days. It’s been, at least in terms of my lifetime, loaded amply with endless political blah blah blah.

 

Undoubtedly, the aftermath analysis (pure bluster and endless windbaggery) will continue uninterrupted. But, not by ME! This is my final word on the impending election.

 

So, if you are aware of the issues; understand them; and, understand what’s truly at stake, then choose a candidate according to the dictates of your consciences and go vote. Otherwise, don’t vote; stay home or go to the mall or something.

 

I’ve made up my mind. I’ve chosen the candidate that, at least for me, exemplifies the personal characteristics necessary to deal with the unique risks of OUR time.

 

About a week ago, I was channel surfing. It was around 2 AM—I’m a night person but I awake early, too. A movie, The Hunt for Red October, was just beginning on the AMC channel (American Movie Classics).

 

I’m not much of a movie buff, but, for some reason, I decided to watch this one just to see where the plot was going. I didn’t have to wait long at all.

 

Essentially, its plot—set in the Cold War era—revolved around THE top gun—Captain Marko Ramius—of the Soviet Union’s Submarine Fleet and his critical decision to defect, vessel and all, to America rather than become a likely accomplice in the thermo-nuclear destruction of the United States.

 

Once at sea, he announced his intentions to his handpicked loyal officers. He calmed their apprehensions over the Soviet Navy hunting them down and destroying them by letting them know that his fear was not the Soviet Navy, but America’s Navy.

 

Speaking to his First Officer, he used a term, “buckaroo,” in describing his greatest apprehension regarding a successful defection.

 

Paraphrasing, he said something to this effect: “If we encounter a temperate American commander capable of thinking before acting, we’ll be fine.” Again, paraphrasing, he continued with, “…but, if we meet some “buckaroo” with a gun-slinging OK Corral mentality, we’ll all be dead.”

 

This is not a movie review. You may click here to read about it if you’d like to do it. You can even watch it yourselves. It’s still circulating among the cable channels on a regular basis.

 

My point is the relationship between the term, “buckaroo,” and what we now know can happen when we choose the wrong person to lead our country.

 

“Buckaroo” struck me as an apt description of the man I voted for in the 2000 election and again in the 2004 election. I have forgiven myself for the mistake in 2000. I was lulled just like millions of others were.

 

However, my mistake in 2004 was a matter of unadulterated, plain personal stupidity. Mea culpa… mea culpa… mea maxima culpa!

 

I think that George W. Bush turned out to be a “buckaroo” in the truest cowboy sense of the word: tough talking, gun slinging, sodbuster hating, ideologically driven, as well as the epitome of an “either them or us” attitude.

 

He’s shown himself as being light-years from even the slightest form of any meaningful intellectual curiosity or temperance. To me, he’s made himself a de facto poster boy for ALL who are afflicted with a vacuous “ready-fire-aim” mentality.

 

“Buckaroo” mentality has gotten us into this mess. Speaking for myself, however, I’ve had enough “buckaroory” to last me the rest of my life. We can’t afford another “buckaroo!”

 

Throughout our nation’s history, at those times most crucial to our survival, we’ve always been able to look beyond simple-minded, highly partisan issues and personal concerns to elect a president most suitably character-matched to our country’s timely critical needs.

 

This November-4 is not the time for us to break the chain. America’s next president will have to stare down perils far more dangerous to our national survival than anything (other than WWII and the Cuban Missile Crisis) I can remember.

 

Both candidates are politicians. Make no mistake about it. Both candidates, like all politicians, have pandered to the lowest, “don’t-raise-our-taxes,” “keep-us-safe,” “tell-us-what-we-want-to-hear” common denominators.

 

They do it because it’s what we demand of them. We typically do not elect people who tell us truths that we’d rather not hear.

 

We can’t afford it this time around, though. Current challenges require us to see beyond such pettiness and look to the candidate whose true character most matches the critical needs of OUR time. All the other stuff is pointless.

 

There is no way any of us can tell, factually… beforehand, what kind of president either candidate will be. All we can do is examine the problems we face, how we got there, what we must do to change the circumstances, and decide which candidate is best suited to accomplish the mission.

 

Our country—at least over the past 40-years or so—has been center-right, not center-left. And, we don’t so much “lean” as we “wobble.” In other words, the political map contains a great deal more purple than absolute red or absolute blue. So, neither a Righty nor a Lefty is a simple shoo-in.

 

For me, therefore, how a candidate conducts a campaign is more important than what a candidate promises the electorate. The fact is, at least this time, most of the financial and tax related promises from either candidate are moot because mainstream America is broke.

 

Other than some superficial shifting of financial burden, there will not be any tax cuts. Health care reform is also off the table because it will cost too much. Not only does the next president face unprecedented deficits, the national debt will hit the $12-trillion mark with ease.

 

As for our national security, national safety, “war on terror,” and world opinion issues, we have to decide which kind of personality and character we want leading us.

 

Do we want a gun slinging, take no prisoners, ready-fire-aim “buckaroo,” or, do we want a goal-setting, smart, temperate, and seemingly rattle-proof pace setter—especially under pressure—to begin leading us back on track in these areas?

 

Will McCain be a “buckaroo?” I don’t think so, at least not to the degree that George Bush has been. But given his penchant for temper-driven revenge, I have serious doubts as to his suitability.

 

Additionally, I’m not going to underestimate his potential for becoming a bit of a “quasi-buckaroo,” either—a much higher degree of intellectual curiosity notwithstanding.

 

His entire campaign has been a medley of gratuitous optimism sheathed in a typical bastion of political buzzwords. He’s habitually reacted to his opponent by following the Gospel according to Karl Rove: sling mud ‘til it sticks.

 

He’s made frequent leadership changes. His message has vacillated from conservative to moderate to maverick to anti-regulation to pro-regulation to strict pro-life, to “modified” pro-choice.

 

At best, he’s seemed irregular, short-run goal oriented, looking to win the daily zinger award, and ricocheting from one position to another in vain attempts at appealing to whichever faction of his base whined the loudest.

 

Contrast this to Obama—no saint by any means. But, consistency has been a constant campaign hallmark from the beginning.

 

HE set the tone. No matter how viciously the other side has attacked his character, he’s not waivered, even slightly, from his message.

 

He’s remained steady, unflappable, on topic, long-run goal oriented. He’s a Liberal in the truest sense of America’s definition of the term. But, he’s impenitent about it, refusing to run for the tall grass.

 

As a Conservative, I do not agree with most of Obama’s politics. However, at this point, we, most certainly, do NOT need another “buckaroo,” not even a “quasi-buckaroo.”

 

We need a solidly rooted, mentally strong, levelheaded mind, and rock steady hand on the helm of state.

 

We need a person who’s willing and able to invite meaningful, insightful debate: a person who thinks first, acts with forethought, and refuses to be riled into irresponsible actions.

 

As I wrote above, Obama is a Liberal: tried and true. It does not worry me all that much, however. And, contrary to what his opponents claim, he’s not a Socialist.

 

Take heed. If he wins, that politically centered-right wobble I spoke of a few paragraphs above here will determine how he governs more than any other influencing factor. I think he’ll do fine.

 

He’s ahead right now in the polls. Hopefully, he’ll remain too smart to rest on his laurels. As Ronald Reagan often did during his numerous political campaigns, Obama must constantly check with the late “President” Dewey concerning those polls.

 

While I think Barack Obama is the better candidate at this critical juncture, others, every bit as sincerely, may not think so. And, John McCain could well prove me wrong. If he wins on November 4, for all of our sakes, I sincerely hope he does.

 

Joe Walther is a freelance writer and publisher of The True Facts. You may comment on his column by clicking here.