Friday, November 05, 2004

The current meme being passed around by the Democrats and their MSM organs is that Bush won the election because of "red-staters" who believed "moral values" were the most important issue of the campaign. "Moral values" is being spun to mean "hated gays". This is transparent nonsense.

What's going on here? Well, when is a war over? Exactly when one side agrees it has been defeated. Wars end psychologically, not materially. That's what allows little countries like North Vietnam to defeat big countries like the United States. They destroyed us psychologically.

Similarly, an election is over when the defeated party agrees that it is over. If they refuse to agree, and if they convince themselves utterly that the election was lost for reasons which are illegitimate, then they can keep up the good fight and deny the reality which obtrudes upon their pleasant narrative of victory.

That "moral values"--whatever that might mean--were not the issue for most voters in this election is elegantly attested by this new blogger who calls himself "Hogarth". Here's a small excerpt:

Specifically, I voted against:

- I voted against a man that clearly used his Vietnam experience as resume padding. After failing to get his requested deferments, he enlisted in the Naval Reserve, fully expecting stateside duty. When that didn't work out for him, he went overseas and bought a 8mm movie camera to chronicle his exploits. Once enough film was in the can, he gamed the system and got his three purple hearts. Had he been an enlisted man, I think I could have lived with that. As an officer, expected to lead and set a positive example for his men, I cannot. His actions in Vietnam showed early on that this man does not understand or care about the responsibilities of being a leader.

- I voted against the man that came back from Vietnam and slandered his fellow soldiers, ostensibly in protest of our involvement in the war, but more likely in order to make a name for himself to launch his political career. I voted against the treasonous action of illegally meeting with North Vietnamese and Viet Cong representatives on two, if not three, occasions. The fact that he was still in our military at the time exacerbates my feelings of disgust at his actions. There are right ways to protest the actions of our government, and there are treasonous ways to protest. This man chose the path of dishonor.

- I voted against the man that can't seem to tell the truth about even innocuous things like having run in the Boston marathon (he did not). I voted against the man that testified before the Senate that he was in Cambodia in December, 1968. He was not. As examples of this casual, and possibly pathological, lying became even more common I decided that there was no way in the world he could be trusted on any topic. It became even more obvious who had the most credibility between Kerry and the 254 Swift Boat Vets that had come forward to share their direct experiences with Lt. Kerry, war hero.
Works for me.


Post a Comment

<< Home