Skip to main content

Why I'm Voting for Jim Harbaugh

Voting.  Some people do it religiously.  Some people make fun of the people who do it religiously. Some of us have no faith in the system but vote just for the heck of it.  So, yes, I intend to vote, but, no, I will not be voting for any of the names on the ballot, Republican, Democrat, or Third-Party.  I am voting for Jim Harbaugh.

"Who is Jim Harbaugh?" you might ask.  Well, Jim Harbaugh is the head coach of the Michigan Wolverines.  He has them currently ranked #3 in the CFP standings and sitting at 9-0, just three wins away from their first B1G championship game.  Go Blue!  Now, you might say that that doesn't necessarily qualify a person for a position of civil authority, and you'd be 100% right.  So let me go ahead and explain my thought process on why I am voting for Jim Harbaugh.

1) I have always liked to go against the grain.  I'm sort of a prick sometimes, I guess.  Mainly I just like to have fun and, you see, voting for one of the popular choices is so boring.  Maybe I'm just emotionally damaged and making light of a depressing situation is a defense mechanism.  That's probably it.

2) I sincerely believe Jim Harbaugh would be a better president than Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.  Don't you (OSU fans can shut up right now)?  That is not necessarily to say that I think that he would actually be good at it.  It says more about them than it does about him, really.  He has shown more executive capability and stalwart character than either Hillary or Trump.  To put it starkly, he would ruin our country less than either of them.

3) He is an entertaining person.  He does stuff like this.  Now, the other two candidates have the chance to be entertaining, but Harbaugh's entertainment value promises less war and international disgrace.  He's sort of a harmlessly entertaining guy.

4) Voting for Jim Harbaugh is primarily a gesture to communicate my lack of faith in the two-party system.  I'm fed up and cynical and I refuse to be a sheep.  I refuse to be a dog returning to its vomit every four years.  I refuse to put faith in a system and an institution that have repeatedly shown themselves to be broken.  That, more than anything, is what I want my vote to tell America.  It's not a wasted vote.  It's a vote that sends a message that I know every vote is wasted.  That's why I voted for Tim Tebow last time around (secretly I'm just hoping to "make" the news again).

5) Frankly, I couldn't think of anyone better.

#jimharbaughforpresident
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...
Post a Comment
Read more

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...
Post a Comment
Read more