I cannot believe I still have to protest this shit

There is a lot to be amazed about in a US election campaign. The candidates, their views, the money involved, the ads, the extent to which it’s covered by international media – it’s like a circus in every sense of the word. There’s Rick Perry appearing as the (somewhat unwilling) clown, with Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain as (more willing) side-kicks. Mitt Romney is an elephant – too “big” for the setting, seemingly clumsy, but trying to blend in as best he can. If there’s anything remotely religious going on, Rick Santorum’ll find his place, Michele Bachmann by his side. Ron Paul might be one of the lions – restricted to a much too confined space, though with a voice quite different from the others. And Barack Obama is the gymnast, walking on a thin line above their heads, with the upper hand, though shaking slightly.

Now that the Republican race has (reluctantly) narrowed down, and two men remain for the main election in the fall, the circus becomes more limited, but not necessarily any less crazy.

In his quitting speech just last week, Newt Gingrich asked himself whether Mitt Romney is conservative enough:

“Compared to Barack Obama? This is a choice between Mitt Romney and the most radical, leftist president in history.”

To a northern European such as myself, this statement seems odd. In my view, there is hardly anything radical or leftist about Obama. Sure, compared to the Republican crowd maybe, but then again who wouldn’t be? To be a radical, socialist, leftist in the company of people who think contraception and abortion should pretty much be banned, who think religion should be mixed up (or actually define) their political views, who do not think that people who are gay should be allowed to openly say this in the army, nor should they get married… To distance oneself from those views is not hard. It’s normal. It’s common sense. Or socialist propaganda, however you want to look at it.

I have no trouble saying that I prefer Obama to any in the Republican camp. Though, if I was American, I don’t think I’d vote for him because of his politics, if not only because he is the only sensible choice available. Obama has done some good stuff, but then he has also failed to do significant things. He has abolished Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but he has failed to close Guantanamo. He might want to close it, and there are definitely other factors involved that might have hindered him towards that goal, but still – it remains, and so do the 171 detainees who have now been there for a decade. And the fact that he has not prosecuted any of the wrongdoers in the former administration, that he wants to look forward and not backward in relation to the “War on Terror”, worries me. The US’ use of drones likewise – killing by remote control, the death penalty without trial. He also, at some point, in a speech I remember hearing, stated that America is the best country in the world. Obviously, I realize that there are certain things a US president must say in speeches, like God bless America, etc. But the idea of exceptionalism that is so widespread in US politics should in my opinion not be encouraged – it has not helped you in the past.

It is however extremely clear that Obama is a smart and sensible man in many ways. I can’t say the same about his opponents. One day recently I was listening to The Political Scene, which is a podcast from The New Yorker magazine. Staff writer Ryan Lizza and others were discussing contraception and the debate about it in the US at the moment, mainly trying to figure out why they were debating it in the first place. Ryan talked about a woman he’d seen protesting  in Washington D.C. And that piece of cardboard expresses my exact feelings on the matter: Why the hell is contraception an issue in a 2012 US presidential election? One of the main issues, in fact.

One would think they’d have more pressing things to think about.

I can understand that abortion is a tough subject – at least I can understand it more than contraception. First of all I think many US politicians need to look up what contraception means and what it does, before calling themselves pro-life and thinking that settles the matter. Contraception doesn’t kill, it prevents – this cannot be hard to understand. According to Arizona state law condoms might mean murder, but not to any rational living person.

Also, we are, as most of us are aware, living in 2012. Contraception’s been around for years, and it’s here to stay. I know the former pope once said  you shouldn’t use it, because obviously AIDS is God’s punishment because we’ve all been behaving so badly – and who would like to deprive God of the joy of slowly and painfully killing us all? Obviously, we shouldn’t argue with God – because he’s God. Isn’t that right, Santorum? Romney? Gingrich? According to you, it seems to be favourable to run a country based on the rationale of tales in a book that were written thousands of years ago, than by rational thinking that corresponds to our day and age.

It’s time to wake up.

Just because you don’t understand something, doesn’t make it evil. Just because something scares you, doesn’t make it wrong. Just because you don’t agree with something, doesn’t make it socialist. In fact, I find it somewhat insulting that you’d use that word in connection with US domestic politics, because you’re not even close to it. Keep to your right-wing, religious nonsense, but don’t make the rest of us listen to you. Please. And don’t let your whims create more wars than you’re already in – it’s not worth it.

Sometimes, Obama is actually right – look forward, not back. Get out of the circus, open up your narrow minds, and make sure that the woman above doesn’t have to go to the streets protesting with that sign again.