Holy bumper stickers, Batman! We’ve had yo-yos, hula hoops, pet rocks, frizbees, cabbage patch kids, and now we have… Barak Hussein Obama? The leftwing nutcases of Iowa and New Hampshire… who apparently see the American presidency as just another "fun thing" to do… have come close to giving a totally inexperienced politician, armed with nothing more than an abundance of personal charm and boundless ambition, a one-way ticket to the White House.

Of course, Iowa voters are known for a strong touch of insanity. They have, after all, elected Tom "Dung Heap" Harkin to the United States Senate for four consecutives terms. What could be more insane than that? Either they’ve been sniffing too much undiluted hog manure or they’ve learned long ago that cooking and fermenting corn produces a clear distilled liquid that can be used for something other than gasoline additives.

Watching the returns pour in from across Iowa and New Hampshire and listening to Obama’s over-the-top rhetoric, attempting to paint himself as the reincarnation of John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., all rolled into one, I was reminded that the Kevin Costner film, Field of Dreams, was also set among the cornfields of Iowa.

The movie tells the story of Iowa corn farmer, Ray Kinsella, whose deceased father had been a lifelong fan of the Chicago White Sox, and especially the Sox’ famed left fielder, Joseph "Shoeless Joe" Jackson, who was banned from baseball for his role in the infamous 1919 Black Sox scandal.

In the film, Kinsella (Costner) hears a mysterious voice whispering to him from his cornfields. The voice tells him, "If you build it, he will come." Kinsella is convinced that if he were to build a baseball diamond in his cornfield something miraculous would happen… the long-dead players of the 1919 White Sox might actually return to play baseball on his field.

The film's underlying theme, the pursuit of impossible dreams, is no more ethereal than Obama’s high-sounding, but vacuous, campaign theme, "Change We Can Believe In," which holds out the promise of beneficial change without ever hinting at what that change might be, or what it might cost.

Barrack Hussein Obama leaped onto the American political stage in 2004, right out of Harvard Law School and two terms in the Illinois state legislature. Never before in history has a young politician, after serving just two terms in a state legislature, talked his way into the United States Senate, and after just two years in the Senate, felt he was prepared to be the leader of the free world. This is more than mere political ambition; this is monumental conceit, it is madness on a grand scale.

Is he charming? Yes. Is he ambitious? Yes, immensely. But is he prepared to be President of the United States? Absolutely not!

The people who climbed onto the Obama bandwagon in Iowa and New Hampshire are people who would go to the airport and board an airplane if Obama asked them to do so. But we can predict with absolute certainty that when they arrived at the airport, most would demand to know if the plane they boarded would be taking them to the frozen wastes of Fargo, North Dakota or to the sun-drenched beaches of Hawaii. Yet, those same bandwagon riders appear to have little curiosity about where Obama would take the country politically, economically, or militarily.

For example, the people of the United States are now confronted with the most numerous, most deadly, enemy we have ever faced: the forces of radical Islam. Yet, as Obama campaigns for the job of Commander in Chief, he appears totally unconcerned that Islamic Jihad is sworn to either convert or murder every man, woman, and child in America. He rarely, if ever, refers to Islam, Islamic terrorism, the War on Terror, or Islamo-fascism.

So, exactly where does this former Muslim student stand on the War on Terror? If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent his patrol boats to sink an American warship in the Persian Gulf, what would President Obama do? We know what Ronald Reagan would have done, and we know what George Bush, Dick Cheney, John McCain, Fred Thompson, and other Republicans would do. But can we ever be certain what Obama would do, if anything? Would he be as conciliatory toward Ahmadinejad as Lord Chamberlain was with Adolph Hitler and the Third Reich? The people have a right to know.

Obama may be a breath of fresh air among the dilettantes of the radical left, but if and when he is put before the American electorate as the Democratic nominee he is certain to come under much closer scrutiny. For starters, he’ll almost certainly be asked to explain why he voted "present" on more than 130 occasions during his two terms in the Illinois legislature, apparently lacking the courage to commit himself by voting either "yea" or "nay" on politically sensitive issues.

By the time he’s finished explaining himself, serious-minded people will likely see him as just another passing fad.