Thursday, November 04, 2004


For the sake of argument, let's say that this election was decided on "moral values," which is one of the story lines that is being tossed around. News reports are saying that huge numbers of voters who cited "moral values" as the most important criteria in this election voted for Bush.

So, a large number of people chose the moral leadership of a guy who:

Repeatedly lied about, ridiculed, and slimed his opponent.

Went to war unnecessarily, committing thousands of US soldiers and Iraqi citizens to death.

Quietly condones torture and disregards due process.

Sorry, too depressed to go on right now.

Wednesday, November 03, 2004

Looking forward with sarcasm and despair

Some things to expect in a Bush II term, or things that I was hoping would be better in a Kerry term:

Foxes guarding the hen house - lobbyists and former corporate exec types in key government positions. Mercury in the water? We got your mercury!

New Supreme Court justices - god help us.

"Things are going great in Iraq, nothing to see here, move along please."

Osama on the loose - if we couldn't get this guy when it would have helped Bush politically, what chance is there of getting him now?

And the big one - the overarching philosophy that government does not have a role in helping the people in this country who need help. "Government bad! Vote for me."


Grumble grumble grumble curse curse grumble.

First Entry

11/3/04 AM, or for the context-challenged, the day after the '04 elections. My main concern is with the presidential election, as my uninformed nature and damnable lack of focus prevents me from paying attention to congressional or state office elections.

At this moment, Kerry has not conceded. That may happen soon, but for the moment there is still some hope that he'll be the next president.

Since the post-election analysis has already begun, I wanted to get a few thoughts down before any story lines get thrown around as conventional wisdom.

Seems to me one of the most significant aspects of Bush's success is the misinformation among his supporters. Sorry I don't have a citation here, but there was a poll recently showing that the majority of his supporters believe that Iraq has WMD, that Hussein had something to do with 9/11, etc. Stuff that's been refuted by, you know, objective news reports, bipartisan commissions, professional analysis.

If you believe these things, why wouldn't you support the guy?

I ain't knowledgeable enough to say what the cause of the misinformation is (a lame cop-out that you can expect to see more of on this site). But Bush and his administration bear a big responsibility for it. A big part of his success is dishonesty and misdirection. And that should be considered a big part of his legacy.