Sure, It's Silly, But...

This website does have a little fun in the wish-fulfillment category.

Yes, I know the wish-fulfillment comes from a bunch of atavistic, violent and simplistic misunderstandings of the way the world works, or so certain people would like to tell me. Part of me doesn't care; I cite the late Mike Royko's take on John Wayne movies:

I never went to a John Wayne movie to find a philosophy to live by or to absorb a profound message. I went for the simple pleasure of spending a couple of hours seeing the bad guys lose.

The Christian in me knows this isn't the best witness to make, but I'll confess I don't mind watching the real-world bad guys lose either. I'm working on that.

And yes, the site creators obviously never watched one of McClane's favorite old Westerns, or they would know how to spell "Yippie-ki-yay" properly. The video, by the way, has a few moments of that free-range vocabulary some people don't like, so be warned.

But isn't it interesting how easily the concept of this movie character can be slotted into a presidential race? Isn't it interesting how easily people can come up with reasons why he fits the broad strokes of one of our ideal politician profiles, like regular guy or gal, tough on crime, you know where he or she stands, not afraid to take action, not afraid to handle tough issues, etc. Watch almost any candidate for any office and you'll find those sorts of things sprinkled all over the advertising as well as the news coverage of their race. Even candidates who for personal reasons take a pass on violence will still talk about common-man (or woman) roots and do their best to play the "know where he or she stands" card.

Some of this rhetoric shows up because these are probably not bad qualities to want in people who hold public office. But I think some of it also shows up because these images are those into which candidates think they must find a way to fit themselves if they expect to win votes, regardless of how well their ideas, policies and plans actually mesh with those public expectations.

I've heard few candidates for any office talk about policy goals as well as idealist visions, real-world rationales for their plans as well as rhetorical tropes, etc. At least, few candidates who aren't stuck in the land of Microscopia when it comes to their poll numbers. And I've seen few media outlets devote much time to finding out those ideas, rationales and policies. After all, there's all that all-important Angelina Jolie womb-census we need to report on.

I guess I could get ticked off that a made-up Hollywood character is being inserted into one of the most important decisions we Americans make. But I find it hard to do. For one, I'd be a hypocrite. For another, I groove on the idea of someone who would say, "Yes, there are bad guys, and they should lose." And for another, it's a joke; you know, the whole "not serious" thing.

And probably most of all, a significant portion of the political candidates above the state level are as much created image as they are actual substance. In my gloomier moments, I get the feeling the percentage of image increases along with the level of office sought.