....LMB: "Moral Mandate Myth"....

So is it just Democrats who visit girl-on-girl-action websites?

Well, claiming it's a new thing and a mandate this time is easier than saying, "They helped get him into the White House twice and since they had to play nice for four years they want their payback now."

Not conservative enough? Who do they fucking want, Adolf Hitler? Or are they just saying that 'cause he's a latino?

Apparently, some conservatives feel that past Gonzales rulings aren't as anti-abortion as they could be.

But also remember, Jake that Gonzales was the guy who gave W his reports on if a person should be executed or not. His reports were often found to be incomplete and lacking crucial details about false evidence, mistrials, etc. The Atlantic had an article almost a year ago on this.

the problem with the blanket term "moral values" is that it gives no indication as to what the voter means when saying that. they could mean religion, but also many other things.

im sure that a perceived morality, in that old fashioned biblical sense did play its part, but i would agree that it wasnt the main factor.

if religion played no part then candidates who are athiests would be viable. at present they are far from it. its funny, but in our current cultural climate all candidates are required to trump up their religious convictions in order to get the votes.

This "moral values vote" -- myth or otherwise -- is a gift from God -- myth or otherwise. It almost instantly turned the various Republic factions against each other. Most likely, the meme of the moral values vote is the result of run-of-the-mill media sloppiness. But if it was a piece of Democratic disinformation, it was friggin' brilliant!

I just love that conservatives are "allowed" to attack Cheney's daughter, but Kerry saying that she's gay is the worst thing on Earth.

Gimme a break.

Never mind that these are the same exit polls that were supposedly flawed because they Kerry winning Ohio.

The 80's all over again? Does that mean I can finally bring back that "I Wear my Sunglass At Night" song? Yes!

Keep in mind, though, Jake, that there are rich people who voted Democrats, mainly because the Bush policy would be so disastrous to their fortunes in the long run. The more discerning of the rich know this anyway.

To clarify - I mean Bush's policies would be disastrous to the rich if they cause significant anger among the working class and poor. Remember that liberal Keynesian economics (like the New Deal, Great Society, etc.) are not so much about helping the working poor, but just giving them enough to stave off social strife between the classes and save capitalism from itself. The funny thing is that the Democrat leadership is doing what they can to repeal their reformist legacy and their liberal supporters are chasing them to the right.

Confiscation of one's hard earned money and doling it out to the "less fortunate" along with other social engeneering concepts can fall under the
category of "morals".

As a "right-winger" I would like to share with ya'll another perspective. I honestly believe that we need a certain divisiveness in the nation for balance because it keeps the extremists on both sides at bay. I am glad we don't have a President-Elect Kerry. He would further empower the UN which I consider to be a hostile entity toward the USA. They should be relocated to Paris.

But that's another subject. What I'm trying to say is I don't want my party to monopolize the gov't like the Dems have for so long. It would only embolden the nuts to think they can push their agendas. But when I see how the Dems try to explain why they lost I am baffled!

To the point, here goes:

Dump the Michael Moore/Hollywood crowd. They understand NOTHING about how the majority of Americans feel. Political dialogue can be POLITE (the root word!)and still be effective. Bomb throwing and personal attacks cause well deserved suspicion.

Open your minds to the point of view of gun owners and NRA members(stop snickering for a minute and hear me out:^). I understand how people from large urban areas have such a disdain for firearms. They see stories about drive-by shootings and school kids on a rampage and they just want the dangerous things to be gone. The problem is with sweeping legislation that only affects the law abiding and actually aids and emboldens the criminals. Try to restrain your emotions and see the reality (if you really want to win back the hearts and minds of people)that some folks like the security of having a firearm and can contribute to society by making it harder to be a criminal. Where does a career mugger want to live? In a state with a concealed carry law?

Too much weight is given to the moral/gay-marriage/abortion issues. Yes, many will base their vote on one or more of these but I think that after 9/11 they are back burner to most folks.

There's a lot more to add but I'll let this little bit ride and see what kind of response it gets.