removing the "mis" from information

Saturday, February 12, 2005

Finally, a fragment the long-promised study...

Election 2004 Post-Mortem: Analyzing the Democratastrophe

Those who are familiar with my politics know that at my core I am a Hobbesean libertarian, and independent of any political party. My vote should have been as up-for-grabs as anybody's; how is it that a guy like me found himself solidly in the camp of the Republicans? The answer to that question is, in my view, the same as the answer to may of the questions Democrats find themselves asking now. In this article I will go over some of the things Democrats have done and explain them in terms of the message they send to a non-aligned fellow like myself.

Let's start from the beginning of the election cycle.

At the end of the 2000 election, the Democrats made a strong attempt to overthrow the Constitution of the United States of America. The strategy went as follows: 1) invent grounds for recounting votes in Democrat counties; 2) get infamously left-wing courts to support such a recount; 3) use the Democrat advantage among officials and personnel in those counties to manufacture enough votes to give the state, and the election, to Al Gore; 4) use the media to intimidate anyone who tried to stop them. I watched it happen play-by-play; anyone who thinks the actuality of what occurred was substantially different than this is deluding themselves. Thanks to the grace of God upon America, they failed. However, this didn't stop them from giving us four years of "selected, not elected" and other permutations that built on the fictions created to swing Florida.

Message: Democrats will do anything to win regardless of law, tradition, or decency.

From the moment the Supreme Court gave the slapdown to the Democrat party's shenanigans, the Left has refused to acknowledge that, as heartbreaking as the loss may have been, election 2000 was played by the rules and fairly won by the GOP. To this day, a very large faction of Democrats still believe that George Bush was not legitimately elected in 2000. Those Democrats who brought that same logic to their analysis of the 2004 election serve as an example, to the more mildly inflicted in that party, of how foolish, bitter, self-serving, and unjust the Democrat claims about 2000 and their follow-up actions and rhetoric look to an average Joe like myself.

Message: Democrats should rule by divine right like the old kings of France. Why even bother with an election?

The Florida Fictions, as I'll refer to them in shorthand, were thrown repeatedly at the President from Election Day 2000, every single day, echoed endlessly by the mainstream media, e.g. CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post, etc. (hereafter referred to as "Old Media"). Fast-forward to September 2001. After the terror attacks on New York and Washington, the Democrats were able to pause their craven and savage campaign against the President for, oh, maybe ten days total.

Message: Who cares what happens to the USA if the Democrats aren't in charge?

As soon as it was known we were going to attack Afghanistan, the left-wing fiction machine revved back into gear. Was it two weeks after 9/11, or less, that we first saw the word "quagmire" applied to a war that hadn't begun yet? It wasn't almost as if the Democrats wanted us to fail - it was pretty darn clear that they were desperately hoping for the US to fail. Of course, this never reached the fever pitch that it reached in Iraq, but it was certainly loud and clear.

Message: Getting at the President is more important than getting at the terrorists.

Now, after 9/11, most of the country, after a while, took in the new reality - terrorism's ultimate danger was not a bunch of jihadis flying planes into Manhattan, but the potential for an enemy nation to use such people to attack the US in catastrophic ways, without fingerprints pointing to the sponsor state. Forget about chemical and conventional attacks - it is important we stop those, but they are not militarily significant. What is militarily significant is the potential for a biological terror attack, with potential casualties in the hundreds of millions or more; and secondly, a nuclear terror attack, which could kill in the tens of millions and cause many trillions of dollars in physical and economic damage.

Playing defense only is clearly not a solution; at some point the enemy would succeed, unless we were willing to become the most intrusive police state in history, and even then we'd simply be delaying the inevitable. In order to defend America from catastrophic terror, we needed to take the offense, and do it as robustly as possible. Why wait for doom to come, when we have the power to stop it?


Post a Comment

<< Home