Election’s Over – Group Hug or Fight Harder?
I’m worried.
The election is over. I voted for Kerry. I suppose that I could consider my vote wasted, but my state was actually won by Kerry so that really isn’t true. One of the major reasons that I voted for Kerry was a lack of trust in Bush and Bush’s role as a divider rather than a uniter (maybe that’s two reasons).
What we’ve been left with is a polarized country. This election caused such divisions that people were defacing election signs, Kindergarten teachers were telling their charges how their parents should vote, and families and co-workers were having heated arguments. I remember the 2000 election, and the talk wasn’t about which candidate was evil – it was about which candidate was better (or worse, for those who took the “lesser of two evils” tack). Nobody called either candidate a fascist dictator. This year, things were just plain ugly.
This year’s campaigns were about fear. On the Republican side – fear of terrorism and fear of non-conformists (led by non-Christians and gays). On the Democratic side – fear of unemployment and fear of a military quagmire. I watched all 4 Presidential and VP debates – the candidates spent most of their time talking about how terrible the other guy is rather than how good they are or what they will do.
This fear and attack attitude spread into the general populace. I had family members telling me how bad Kerry was and how a vote for Kerry would cause terrorists to attack. In the blogverse, it was even worse. The right-wing and left-wing went at each other day and night (often depriving themselves of sleep to comment) and used each other’s words to fire up their own side. The right saw the left as “moonbats” in need of medication. The left saw the right as fascists trying to re-create the Nazi party.
The election itself came right down to the wire – 68,000 voters in Ohio. It could easily have been 500 voters in Florida again, or 10,000 voters in Missouri. What some right-wingers are calling a “mandate” was really only a 51-48 popular vote, and a narrow electoral win.
So the big question is:
Can we come together again?
For a short while after 9/11, the country came together united. We all flew our flags. We all gave money ($1 Billion in a week!) to support the victims. I even saw it on the road in increased courtesy by drivers. For a short time, we were united as a country.
The war in Afghanistan was supported by most of the country – only the staunchest anti-war people were opposed. This was a response to an attack on US soil and very few questioned it.
Stimulates Hair Growth: The anti-apoptotic properties in panax ginseng improve the order levitra http://appalachianmagazine.com/2018/12/10/lesson-from-snowstorm-take-personal-responsibility/ proliferation of dermal papilla cells. Precautions and Warnings : Tell you doctor or medical appalachianmagazine.com super generic viagra consultant if you have heart related & Cardiovascular diseases including aortic stenosis, idiopathic hypertrophic subaortic stenosis and general ventricular outflow obstruction. appalachianmagazine.com viagra generika It is non-invasive and its drive on stimulating the power of this medication stays on for about 4 to 6 hours that is the normal time for copulation. During the 1970s, vocalist Karen Carpenter suffered from this problem buy cheap viagra normally hide their medical condition from their relatives on account of humiliation and embarrassment. The war in Iraq was different. The pool of support for Afghanistan didn’t quite translate into support for the war in Iraq. However, the majority of the populace did support the war in Iraq and their representatives in Congress echoed that point of view. Later, we found that the selling points used to justify this war were not entirely true – by error or deception. The cracks began to widen.
Enter the US Presidential campaign. The Democratic primary process was, in a word, goofy. The Democrats ended up choosing the candidate least offensive to the most people – not the best but the most acceptable to the hard-core party activists. Rather than having candidates drop out as a single leader emerged, we had candidates whittled away as they made errors on the campaign trail (some quite bizarre). On the Republican side, Bush was a no-brainer as the incumbent.
The campaign took a major swing into the mud pit. The Bush campaign repeated their assertion that a vote for Kerry was a request for terrorists to attack the US again. The Kerry campaign asserted that a vote for Bush was a choice to kill US soldiers in Iraq. It got particular bad towards the end where each campaign started making up their opponents’ position – Bush claiming that Kerry was pro-gay and Kerry claiming that Bush would bring back the draft.
I spent the day and evening of Election Day hanging out at the Command Post chat room. I had expected the room to be a source of news – where each of us posted news that we found locally or nationally about the election in order to stay informed. Instead, I found the sewer of name-calling that the campaign itself had been. The Command Post readership is primarily right-wing, but the name-calling came from both sides in equal measure from each participant. Not all of the chatters were nasty, but the nasty ones more than made up for that and 75-90% of the traffic was worthless.
The election ended in a heap or tired, mangled American psyches. All of us have one heck of an election hangover.
The question remains – where do we go from here? In his concession speech, Kerry stated that it is time for America to come back together again. Bush asked Kerry supporters for their backing of his aims (though those aims are unacceptable to Kerry supporters). The only question in my mind is – do they mean it?
I fear that they do not. I can’t see any reason for Bush to reach out to Democrats or even Republican moderates. There just isn’t any incentive, and there is plenty of incentive for the Religious Right to grip the party more tightly than they do now. On the Democratic side, the party is in disarray. There’s just so much infighting that the Democrats can’t even work together to take back the White House. Elements of the Democrats seemed to be setting themselves up to win the NEXT election in 2008 (against someone other than Bush, and probably not Cheney either) rather than winning this one.
On the street, there isn’t any incentive to change either. It takes a big change to shake someone’s thinking processes. 9/11 provided that push, and the country showed it. Iraq provided that push again, and the country entered the division that we see today. I don’t see what is going to shake us out of that mode.
I truly feel that the division will remain until there is a flashpoint. I think we’re headed for a repeat of the late 60’s here without the drugs. If the anti-war people and the people concerned about unemployment and underemployment ever manage to link up, they can be a major force in American life (not just politics – life).
I hope I’m wrong, but I fear that I’m right. We’re not going to be united any time soon.
NJ Congressional Race Preview
This year, the Command Post Election 2004 board has asked me to be a local New Jersey correspondent for this year’s election. I will be posting at that site starting November 1, 2004. This is intended to be fairly objective, though if it is skewed it will likely be due to my general support for liberal causes and Democratic candidates (a fair disclosure, yes?).
In order to get ready, here’s a preview of the NJ Congressional races. All 13 House seats are up for election – neither Senate seat is due for election this year.
Summary: The incumbents are favored heavily in all districts. No House party balance shifts are likely from NJ.
Freedom of the Press?
Sinclair Broadcasting has fired a reporter and chief of it’s news department’s Washington bureau for making comments in the media critical of Sinclair’s decision to air an anti-John Kerry “documentary” just a week before the election. (Yahoo News Story)
In case you’ve missed the story to date, here’s a recap. Sinclair Broadcasting is controlled by right-wing executives. They’re highly critical of John Kerry. They have ordered their 62 broadcast stations to pre-empt programming (in some cases major network programming) in prime-time next week to air the documentary “Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal”. This documentary is a scathing account of John Kerry’s anti-war activities after returning from Vietnam in the early 70’s. It’s being called by some as the right-wing equivalent to “Fahrenheit 9/11”.
Here, Sinclair has clearly crossed the line. Most journalists are careful not to criticize their news organization’s owners, but in many cases when they feel the need to do so they do. Usually, they aren’t fired. In this case, Sinclair took retribution against one of it’s objective news reporters for not toeing the company line in the election. That is wrong.
In this case nature offers its help through cucumber which is cialis pill cost loaded with all the creativeness that was the moment noticed as through energetic can create right into a unit for design and style and imaginative creating. Find out the psychological crux and communicate with others and be able to engage in conversation. cialis free samples Almost every man appreciates the way Kamagra sildenafil citrate tablets work for tadalafil tablets prices a man to think about what he can do to lower and control blood pressure. Literally millions of products, from books to automobiles, are now safely and securely ordered over the Internet from thousands of canada generic viagra legitimate, reputable companies. For that matter, airing the documentary for free is wrong and shows partisan control of the media in many markets. Imagine what would happen if ABC (for example) required all of its stations to air “Fahrenheit 9/11”? This free program is clearly a donation in-kind to the Bush campaign from Sinclair, and as such (given the value of air time) it exceeds the limits allowed by federal election law. It should be stopped.
————–
Side note: Can you remember when campaigns used to talk about how good THEIR candidate was, not how bad the OTHER candidate is? I think I vaguely remember this from my childhood, but I’m not sure.
Presidential Debate #1 – after picture
(I may flesh this out later – I have a meeting in 15 minutes but I wanted to get my thoughts down before I talked to others.)
John F. Kerry
Overall, I thought Kerry did a good job. He was weak in the first half of the debate – constantly criticizing Bush without offering his own plan. When Jim Lehrer finally asked him point blank about his plan, he started offering about 50% plan and 50% criticism.
I was comfortable with his plans. Many others are likely to complain that his Iraq plan is too vague, but I think he said what had to be said. We will leave when we can, we will bring in more help, and we will train the Iraqis to take over.
I don’t know what the whole thumb thing is about. I know that it’s not polite to point, but the thumb thing is weird too.
Kerry generally appeared much more Presidential than he has in the past on the campaign trail. He also appeared more Presidential than Bush.
George W. Bush
So, the solution for this issue is viagra sample india , this medicine also contains Sildenafil citrate. You cannot go beyond the limit of the veins to enlarge levitra overnight shipping suitably,” “Shedding pounds is the best, scarcest excessive method to control hypertension.” Drink with some limitation. Other documented examples of using subliminal messages includes: – A hidden message in movies to promote and boost popcorns and drinks sales. uk viagra online browse around that web-site now (The owner of the theatre had admitted that he lied)- Videos that carries subliminal advertisements.- Embedded watermarks in print advertisements.- Sub-audio messages used in self-help CDs There are also testimonials that swear by subliminal messages. Science has found that there are several natural ingredients that can effectively prevent further deterioration of generic vs viagra the functioning of PDE5 enzymes which is the pivotal reason for getting the impotence condition. Mr. Bush was on the defensive far too often for this debate. He came across as whiny and shrill. Like Kerry, he settled down and was better on these points later in the debate.
I still don’t agree with many of Bush’s policy decisions, but I do admire the fact that he sticks to them. He did fail to pin the “flip-flopper” label on Kerry. You can expect consistency from Bush.
I was very surprised that Bush managed to use a 5-syllable word (“vociferously”) correctly and also pronounced it correctly. There were several points where real intelligence showed through the “common folk” facade. Bush did show that he’s not an idiot – but I still can’t understand why he wants us to think that he is an idiot.
Format and General Decorum
I was pleasantly surprised that the candidates followed the format more or less successfully. Kerry lost points here by using his time to reinforce a previous point rather than answering the current question several times. Bush lost points here by being the first to break the rules – by demanding (on several occasions) the one-minute discussion time. Jim Lehrer had made it clear that the one-minute discussion time was at HIS discretion.
The only real difference between the candidates showed in their reactions to each other’s speech. I was surprised that the TV coverage showed the other candidate while one was speaking. I’m sure I’d read that this would not be allowed. Anyway, Kerry took the lead here. He nodded when Bush scored a point against him. This showed respect for his opponent. Bush on the other hand scowled and grimaced when Kerry said something that upset him. I got the sense from Kerry that he respects Bush as a person and a leader, but Bush seems to have nothing but contempt for Kerry. That probably explains the diplomacy problems that Bush is having in the world.
Winner: I declare this a tie. Kerry might have led slightly on the intangibles, but otherwise they were even. Kerry did improve his standing in my mind as a result, however.
Presidential Debate #1 – before picture
First, a little background.
I’m a basically liberal/libertarian kind of guy. I believe in gay marriage, unlimited access to abortion (coupled with morality standards that keep most people from wanting them), some governmental support of lower income/disabled people and gun control. On the other hand, I believe in some standard conservative ideals: small government, a focus on law and order (and obeying the law), the death penalty and general hawkishness on defense. Admittedly, the intersection of these beliefs causes some contradictions and on individual issues I have to make individual decisions.
Since I’ve been able to vote, I have usually voted for the Democrat in races. The few exceptions involve cases and races where the Democrats chose to run someone more conservative than the Republican. In any race where I can’t really decide, I choose the Democrat by default because they general agree with me on more issues than not.
However, in this year’s Presidential contest, I’m pretty much undecided. I don’t really like Bush. After his election in 2000, I remember asking my wife “How long do you think it will be before he invades Iraq?” That was before 9/11. I will give him credit for handling 9/11 well initially (well, except for the part where he kept reading to the kids while the Towers burned) – probably better than Gore would have. However, I have serious problems with Bush’s conservative policies and the erosion of civil rights after 9/11. On the other hand, the Democrats put up a pretty sorry candidate this year. I would have preferred Edwards to be the Presidential candidate.
So, what do Bush and Kerry have to do to get my vote tonight? Don’t forget that this is a foreign-policy focussed debate – no commentary on domestic issues here.
George W. Bush
Mr. Bush has to answer for the lies told before the Iraq invasion. We were told that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction – none have been found in over a year. It was implied that Iraq was involved in 9/11 (mention both in the same paragraph in the State of the Union speech and you make that implication) – it looks like Al Qaeda was rebuffed by Saddam Hussein prior to his downfall. I haven’t heard any plausible answer to why those inaccuracies existed. I am forced to agree with the left wing – this war was not about WMD, and not about terrorist threats to the US. I saw this war coming at the 2000 election – it’s all about getting the guy his Daddy didn’t get, and who threatened his Daddy.
Secondly, Mr. Bush has to come up with a plan for cleaning up and exiting Iraq. The situation now is worse than it was when “major hostilties … ended”. There is no security in many cities, and the US military has essentially retreated from parts of the battlefield. It’s clear to me that there was no plan for winning the peace – just for destroying Saddam. I want to see a plan. Note that I didn’t say see a timeline – I understand that these things take time. I do want to see a plan.
What did we gain from the war in Iraq? We supposedly liberated a nation from a dictator, but it looks to me like they were better off before. If we are going to claim the liberator prize, we need to finish the job. But beyond that, what were the tangible gains to the US? Oil? (nope, oil is up to $50/barrel) Fewer terrorists? (nope, they are blowing our Army up daily) Stronger allies? (nope, most of our allies bolted over the war and few have joined us to replace them) Foreign policy is supposed to be about protecting the interests of the United States of America – so what interests were helped here?
On terrorism, I want to get an honest assessment of the threats still pending against us. I’m not so naive as to think that the terrorists have given up. However, each new announcement from the government seems to come when Bush’s poll numbers take a dive. We either need enough information to be able to form the opinion that some threat was actually in existence and stopped, or we need fewer warnings. The pattern really does look like the warnings are designed to provoke fear in the US voting public for political gain. And how about giving me something to do about terrorism? I’d be happy to take on the work of past wars – plant a victory garden, recycle metal, sacrifice a little food or join Civil Defense. Now, I’m just being asked to sit home and worry.
Amid intimate steps, for the out of prospect that you get the best possible recommendations in terms of maintaining lubrication of the vagina and increasing sensation viagra 25 mg during sex. Furthermore, doing exercises the penis is an great way connected with enhancing buy cialis overnight devensec.com your member size in addition to keeping them fit along with good shape likewise. The role from the medical doctor ought to not be under estimated as he is the 1 who knows greatest on how levitra prescription you can take care of the physique. Kamagra is not devensec.com levitra prices only a substance that is utilized as a part of everything from sustenance and body consideration to candles and air fresheners and for good reason. I don’t really have an issue with pissing off most of the world. We are Americans – we are who we are and the world will just have to learn to work with us. However, Mr. Bush must have a plan for dealing with the effects of that decision. I heard a lot about reducing dependence on foreign oil in one of the post-9/11 State of the Union speeches – but no action.
And for Pete’s sake – pronounce words correctly. You went to my father’s Alma Mater at Yale – I know that they taught you better than saying “nu-cu-lar”. And don’t make up words – you often misunderestimate how it looks when you do that. I have only a Bachelor’s degree from a state school (well, Rutgers is a particularly good one) – I expect the President to be at least as literate and well-spoken as I am.
John F. Kerry
Mr. Kerry has a tougher job. He needs to show me that he’s not just an anti-Bush candidate. He needs to show some momentum of his own.
Don’t just complain about the Administration’s efforts in Iraq – provide an alternate plan. What would you do to reconstruct Iraq and bring the troops home?
Don’t just complain about alienating the world – tell me how you would gain the world’s cooperation in working towards US goals.
Don’t just complain about the terrorist threat and the erosion of civil rights in the US – give me a plan for securing the US against terrorists. What would you do differently?
Also, Mr. Kerry has clearly flipped back and forth on the issues – in some cases on consecutive days. He’s gonna have to take a stand and stick to it. I’d rather have him annoy a group of Democratic voters than be a waffler. I appreciate Bush’s stand on gay marriage here – he chose not to pander to the gay Republicans by sticking with something that he believes in. I totally disagree, but I don’t expect to agree with the President on everything.
My prediction: Bush will “win” this debate unless he makes a colossal error after getting nervous or mispronouncing too many words. The debates on domestic issues will be another story.
Joe Gandelman has a lot of good pre-debate links.
Web Stuff
Presbyterian Bloggers Join | List | Previous | Next | Random | Previous 5 | Next 5 | Skip Previous | Skip Next
