The Media claims that I'm a stupid ignorant bible thumping Bush supporter from Ohio via West Virginia!

I've come across some great essays on this Moral Values assessment that the Mainstream media has been using to describe us Bush supporters as ignorant and unintelligent bible thumping Morons. Like Seinfeld says "Not that there's anything wrong with them." Well my family, many friends and I spent most of our lives in the Midwest, in that swing state of Ohio. We don't fit this characterization as millions of other Midwesterners don't. I was born in West Virginia and grew up in Ohio and was already educated and well traveled before I came to the Elite region of Kerry Country in Southern California. Anyways Bush only lost California 55% to 44%, not bad considering he hardly spent advertising money here. Enjoy the following the writers who I mostly agree with except for embryonic stem cell research, abortion and gay marriage. They are interesting and pretty much express why I and many of my Midwestern friends voted for President Bush. Furthermore there's nothing wrong with these Midwestern God Loving people! How many of the Bi-coastal elites would be willing to volunteer for the Military and protect this great country? The media, governmental, metropolitan, academic and entertainment elite who have the right to their ideas thanks to the Military, threw everything and the kitchen sink at President Bush. The only Bush 2000 state they won was New Hampshire and the four electoral vote cost George Soros and company 100 million dollars per vote. This was canceled out by New Mexico and icing on the cake included Iowa! Furthermore if you add exit pole numbers Iraq 15% and terrorism 19%, which in my opinion ultmately are the same thing it beats moral values 22% by 12%(15+19=34-22=12). I guess the Media and the Intellectual think I'm stupid, oh well better to be stupid and American than to be smart and French or Dutch or Spanish( oops I am but I think American)! On election day Theo Van Gogh, the great grandnephew of Vincent Van Gogh was murdered by a Jihadist in the Netherlands because he directed a movie "Suppression" dealing with the way women in Islamic contries are treated. The note on his body calls for Jihad against just about everyone in Europe including muslims who aren't muslim enough! http://tinyurl.com/5ybh8 Also my parents tell me that 2 weeks ago an Islamic plot to bomb the equivalent of Spanish Supreme Court was uncovered! http://tinyurl.com/3rl9u
Enjoy Francis

Novelist Roger L. Simon who wrote screenplay for SCENES FROM A MALL, 1991 Directed by Paul Mazursky Cast: Woody Allen, Bette Midler. He has a great website www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/2004/11/the_morals_clau.php#c27368

November 05, 2004: The Morals Clause

Many of the more thoughtful readers of this blog have been essentially disenfranchised by the mainstream media in their preferred explanation for Bush's victory - that it was a redneck assault on gay marriage and stem cell research. This assertion relies on exit polling which lists "Moral Vision" highest among the voters' motivations. Never mind that these same exit polls have been discredited for completely missing the result of the election, let's examine the question itself.

What is "Moral Vision"? Well, it's certainly subject to many interpretations - and one of them could be anti-gay, of course - but that wouldn't have been what would have sprung to my mind had I been stopped by a pollster on my way out of voting. I would have thought immediately of the Middle East and the War on Terror, because I believe that to be a moral war against particularly dangerous brands of fascism that threaten to engulf the world. That was my reason for voting for Bush and it was, to me, entirely a moral one. Although I wasn't stopped, I might well have chosen "Moral Vision" because of that and I favor gay marriage and stem cell research (though I am not qualified to say how extensively it should be funded vis-a-vis other research).

So what we are looking at is a junk question subject to the broadest interpretation. That it is being exploited for other purposes is dishonest and indeed almost sinister. It is also self-destructive to those doing it.
The already discredited exit polls are now being used as fodder for mainstream media to try and determine why us ignorant boobs in Middle America voted for Bush. The answer they come up with: we're all evangelical bigots and are therefore against gays and gay marriage. Well, they may console themselves in any manner they choose, and if they want to bury their arrogant, elitist heads in the sand for another four years and inevitably face another drubbing in 2008, more power to them. For such nuanced people, they sure to like to boil things down to facile, simplistic fundamentals.

To illustrate the complexity they ignore, I thought it would be interesting to chronicle my journey to a 2004 Bush vote. I started out thinking that this might be the year I vote for a Democrat. Other than Bush's foreign policy, I didn't agree with many of his policies. Domestically, I find compassionate conservatism to be frightfully expensive. I think we need tighter immigration laws, not blanket amnesty. In balance, though, I liked (and deserved) my tax cuts, and I don't want to pay $16 for an orange. I have always admired Bush's tenacity, though. His detractors call it stubbornness, but I see it as leadership. I've believed for quite awhile that the job of President of the United States is not a position that should be filled with a politician; rather, it is a position requiring the steadfastness of a true leader. I see that in Bush, and I respect it, even when I don't agree with his decisions.

That said, in foreign policy, even with regards to Iraq, I had some serious issues with President Bush. For example, I thought it was a terrible idea to waste two months chasing UN approval that could never be gained while that organization shaved billions off of the top of the well-intentioned but inherently corrupt Oil for Food program. These months gave Hussein the time needed to hide or dispose of the WMDs everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, knew he had. This led to the PR coup of this young century for our enemies, both domestic and foreign, when we were consequently unable to find the promised stockpiles of weapons. Even earlier on, I thought it was a terrible misjudgment to center on WMDs as the primary reason for going into Iraq. There were, and still are, many valid reasons for our actions in Iraq, but the Bush Administration apparently believed they needed to stress a single, over-riding justification, and unfortunately picked the wrong horse.

So, I was luke warm to a second Bush term, and looked forward to investigating an alternative. I followed the democratic primaries very closely and thought that out of the nine, there was one that I might be interested in voting for. Too bad for Joe that he was deemed by the elites in his party as being too Jewish and too ugly. He may still have been carrying the indelible taint from his prior run with Psycho Al by his side. Either way, long story short we ended up with John Kerry. Prior to Kerry's nomination, I tended towards anti-Bush. After the nomination, I strongly turned Anybody But Kerry. When it came down to making my decision, my vote was somewhat for Bush, but primarily against Kerry and his party.

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.

- I voted against a man that wasted 20 years of opportunity to lead his country as one of only one hundred Senators. I voted against a man that tried to play both sides of every issue. I voted against a man that couldn't even stand up and take the responsibility for his senate votes. I voted against the man that voted against our military procurements as a habit. I voted against the man that voted to gut the intelligence budget, but had the gall to complain about faulty intelligence leading to the 9/11 attacks. I voted against the man who voted to cede Kuwait to Sadaam Hussein. I voted against the man that originally reversed his earlier decision and agreed that Hussein needed to be removed, only to recant when he thought it would gain him his party’s nomination for doing so. I voted against a man that is incapable of demonstrating the strength of his convictions because he simply hasn’t any convictions.

- I voted against a man that would say anything, anything at all, no matter who it hurt to become President, simply to stoke his enormous ego. I voted against a man that accused the incumbent of having "secret plans" to bring back the draft, in order to frighten younger voters and their parents into voting for him. Cutting Social Security, dairy subsidies, whatever - Bush had a "secret plan." These accusations from a man who had a "plan" for everything, with the exception of having a plan to deal with the Swift Boat vets, who clearly stated their plans well in advance. This from a man who could not or would not provide ANY details about his plans.

- I voted against the “whatever Bush has done, I would have done better” load of drivel. 20-20 hindsight is not a quality I look for in a presidential candidate; I prefer one that can look ahead and see opportunities. I look for one that can decisively address unanticipated challenges without having to check the polls first.

- I voted against a man that has vacillated on the most important issue of our time, the war on terror. I voted against the man that has repeatedly denigrated our military leadership in a time of war to score political points with his far-left base. I voted against a man that believes the duplicitous and cowardly French and Germans are more desirable allies than the steadfast British, Australians, and others. I voted against the man that believes killing 3000+ civilians in cold blood, in an attempt to destroy our national will, is a “law enforcement” issue, not an act of war.

- I voted against a man that believes “rich” people like me should pay even more taxes, above the 34% I pay now, while he and his billionaire wife pay less than 14%. I voted against a man that doesn’t understand that corporations are good, not evil. I make my living working for a corporation and do not want to see it damaged by populist rhetoric and class warfare. I voted against a man that believes every person that survives the democratic abortion on demand policy should be supported at a standard of living that surpasses the middle class of every other country in the world by redistribution of my hard-earned income.

If voting against Kerry wasn't enough, I also voted against:

- I voted against a blatantly biased media that applied a double standard in their reporting that surpassed belief. I voted against a media that believed they could get more credible witnesses to Kerry's Vietnam experience by traveling to Vietnam than they could get from 254 Americans, including retired Admirals and a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. I voted against a media that attempted to smear a sitting president using patently bogus documents, and to this day refuses to apologize or hold the responsible parties accountable. I voted against a media that used the despicable actions of a very small group of Abu Graib prison guards to tarnish our entire military and country in pursuit of their cause to get their anointed candidate elected. I voted against a media that apparently believes it was more honorable to run and hide in Canada (or Oxford) to avoid Vietnam service than it was to dedicate six years of your life flying a dangerously obsolete fighter jet in the National Guard.

- I voted against Massachusetts activist judges that feel that they should be able to decide social issues for our entire country. I don't personally think gay marriage would destroy the institution of marriage; I think Hollywood and Washington DC heterosexuals are doing a fine job of that themselves. I really don't have a dog in this hunt so to speak. But I believe that this is an issue for each state to decide. Regarding a national constitutional amendment, I tend to favor amendments that grant rights to minorities over amendments that restrict rights.

- I voted against a party that embraces blowhards like Michael Moore, even to the extent of giving him a seat in the presidential box at their national convention. I voted against barely literate "celebrities" that feel that their opinions are somehow weightier than mine, and the media that enables them. I voted against the party of Terry McAuliffe. I voted against the party of George Soros. I voted against the party that will not denounce groups that cannot and will not tell the difference between the President of the United States and Adolph Hitler. I voted against the party that embraces the first amendment as long as it is not used to ensure the freedom to speak against or criticize them.

Too bad these questions were addressed on the exit polls. The media and democratic party might, just might, have gotten a clue.





Posted by: Hogarth at November 5, 2004 10:40 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Wow, that was a bit wordier than I thought. Sorry about that!


Posted by: Hogarth at November 5, 2004 10:43 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Roger,

You can avoid the disfiguration of your text when using symbols such as ™ and © by encoding them. If you look at the html for this post you'll see that I used (ampersand)trade and (ampersand)copy rather than alt-2 and alt-g from the keyboard.

As to the topic at hand, that the MSM is trying to cast the outcome of the election as some sort of uprising of bigots is hardly surprising. It's projection pure and simple.

Though I have no animosity toward people who value religion or believe in God, I have personally never subscribed to those beliefs. So much so that I don't even feel comfortable calling my self an atheist because I feel the word gives to much credit to the notion of the existence of God. But, anyway...

I don't support "gay marriage" because I believe it's silly and offensive to transfer privileges from one group to another by judicial fiat. Those privileges have been granted over time for reasons deemed beneficial to society. And, if another group wishes similar privileges they should have to demonstrate that there is a societal benefit to each privilege they seek and do so to the satisfaction of a majority of the citizenry, ideally on a state by state basis. It's the only "moral" way to do it as far as I'm concerned.

I voted against public funding of stem cell research here in California because it's a scam. All the evidence I need is that the proponents want public funding. If the research had any merit it would be swimming in private funds. For crying out loud, if all those internet startups could raise billions and billions on pie-in-the-sky fantasies you would think that the possibility of a "cure for x" might make for an acceptable investment.



Posted by: ajf at November 5, 2004 10:46 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The enlightened class has explained that "moral vision" is a "code word" for hates gays and abortion. I guess I'll need a secret liberal decoder to decipher the real reasons I voted for Bush.

Perhaps it's unreasonable to consider that a lot of people agree with Bush's Doctrine for the War on Terror and consider it to fall under the entirely vague label of "moral vision" which John Kerry had very little of.

Nah, that can't be. We were all tricked.


Posted by: Springtime Jones at November 5, 2004 10:48 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I checked the issues exit polling at cnn.com:

Iraq 15%
Terrorism 19%
Economy/Jobs 20%
Moral Values 22%

Note that Iraq and terrorism combined = 34%.

I would venture that almost all of Bush's voters see those two issues as one, making that the top issue. I also think "moral values" reflects our respect for Pres. Bush's character and resolve.

In my opinion, the media is spinning the values issue to make flyover country and Bush voters seem like ignorant rednecks.