by
Melinda Pillsbury-Foster
I
read with interest Ms. Paglia's most recent declaratory exposition,
which ranged, as usual, over many topics in the most recent edition
of Salon.com.
But
what struck me most, tucked in with the other items au courant, was
the interesting juxtaposition of justifications, alternately vaulting
and despising herself and others on one topic most prime in the public
consciousness.
John
McCain, the candidate for president, is a threat of unprecedented proportions,
according to Ms. Paglia, because he is a loner. Ms. Paglia criticizes
the Senator as unconnected -- and therefore unable to act as an administrator
to the nation -- projecting predictions on his future behavior in the
office of president. In so characterizing and arguing the choice of
so many, Ms. Paglia ignores more profound question.
McCain
is not receiving an upswing in support because of an objective perception
of his suitability for office. Far from it. McCain is the newest in
a line of candidates who exemplify what can be characterized as the
Perot factor in the changing currents and political tides in America.
What is different here is that he arises from within a major party and
is receiving support from groups who are being drawn from a population
who would not before have considered supporting a candidate outside
the tribal lines of their formal political affiliations. Hollywood is
climbing on board, posing a grave threat to the Democratic Party.
We
witnessed such an early tremor in the 1980 presidential election with
those identified as Reagan Democrats. But that was the smallest tip
of the larger iceberg that now approaches the traditional world of politics.
McCain
is a marker in history. This election should be watched because to understand
it is to understand the coming changes, which will signal the shape
and direction of the future.
People,
ordinary people, are choosing a cultural direction, which is represented
by their perception of McCain. Not the reality of McCain, mind you,
but the perception. In choosing to use the process of picking an individual
for the office of president to make a statement about their collective
vision for our future they are acting intuitively. But they act in accordance
with our larger cultural perception of the function of this office.
The bully pulpit of Teddy Roosevelt remains just that. It is a means
of setting tone and direction for ordinary people who are otherwise
voiceless. And ironically enough, they are acting precisely as Ms. Paglia
confesses having acted when she voted for Bill Clinton, now exposed
as a rampant sexual predator and profoundly dysfunctional human being,
as a symbol of the advent to power of her own generation. A vote for
Bill Clinton was not an effective "no" vote for Bob Dole.
That is the function of third party candidates. And that was the option
that Ms. Paglia declined.
We
live and breathe in symbols. To understand the political process it
is necessary to consider it in depth and in all of the ways we as human
beings use it to set our course through time.
Yes,
McCain is a cantankerous political loner who may have questions in his
background. But those factual matters are irrelevant to his function
in the process now launched through the primary machinery of politics.
McCain is a direction away from the past, which is perceived as both
the Republican and Democratic Parties. He is a sharp "no"
to politics as usual. He is "yes" to a softening of lines
and a coming together to work for a common vision, which overshadows
the past and makes it irrelevant.
So,
Ms. Paglia, listen, watch, and consider, for the future is coming.
