Posted on 11/23/2004 1:04:10 PM PST by NZerFromHK
"THEY are like mules," a particularly cool bishop remarked the other day of progressives in the Catholic church. "They have no heirs."
Might this also be true of the deconstructionist Left in politics, with its conceivably sui generis progenitors traceable only back to the counter-cultural sixties and seventies? There's an argument to be made.
The re-election of George Bush, an unequivocally combative conservative, and the return of John Howard for a fourth term, suggests climate change in American and Australian politics rather than seasonal variation.
After fighting Bush with dedicated unscrupulousness throughout the presidential campaign, The New York Times tacitly conceded this in a front-page analysis of the election results. The author, Todd Purdom, concluded, "It is impossible to read President Bush's re-election with larger Republican majorities in both houses of Congress as anything other than the clearest confirmation yet that this is a Centre-Right country."
It is significant that the decisive issue in the US presidential election may well have been values. A shell-shocked Left has been trying to cushion the shock by qualifying these as "moral values", in the hope of blaming everything on fundamentalist Christians, whom we all, in the name of political correctness, naturally despise as ignorant, superstitious primitives.
But "values" stands comfortably and forcefully alone in the context of the American elections. It is a word that records a broad, belated popular rejection of the deconstructionist Left's insistent bluff, sustained for the best part of a generation, that only "values neutral" policies are valid.
As in our own election, where the sudden appearance of the Family First party, backed by the Assemblies of God church, startled the deconstructionist Left out of its wits, the religious Right in America did little more than tap the barometer.
In 11 US states where voters had the opportunity to consider constitutional amendments defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman, they supported it in even greater numbers than they did President Bush, to whom the 11 also gave a majority. Fundamentalist Christians cannot alone muster such numbers. The vote was a clear statement by a majority of all voters that values neutrality does not apply to marriage.
I'm not sure if values neutrality is the parent or progeny of political correctness. But I've noticed few, if any, accusations of homophobia being flung at opponents of gay marriage either in America or here. That's a welcome climate change.
Then there is the wonder that, in both countries, abortion has suddenly – virtually since the two elections – become a matter for public discussion, ending 30 years of oppressive silence.
Since the US Supreme Court brought down its Roe v Wade decision in 1973, the deconstructionist Left has ruled the matter closed. A woman is entitled to control of her own body. That's it.
Since 1973, however, science has deepened its knowledge of fetal life and established fairly closely the point at which uniqueness may be assumed. Debate on abortion in 2004 is undisguisably complex.
I think John Kerry suspected the existence of political climate change and dealt with it by running under an assumed identity. Rejoicing all his political life in being an advanced Boston liberal from the Ted Kennedy (deconstructionist) camp, Kerry fiercely denied accusations – accusations! – that he had been the Senate's most liberal member.
A peacenik since his youthful days as an anti-Vietnam War protester, and off-and-on about Iraq, Kerry strove – imprudently, since he proved incapable of looking or sounding the part – to present himself as a warrior who would prosecute the war in Iraq and the war against terror at least as aggressively as Bush (though, of course, more efficiently).
Complaisant hitherto about abortion and same-sex marriage, Kerry brandished a little uncertainty. Towards the end of his campaign, he gingerly introduced his Catholicism – seldom before displayed outside Boston – as an electoral asset. One Sunday in Florida he went to church three times.
Kerry's Democrats sweated blood and money to persuade young men and women to register to vote, believing the youth vote was overwhelmingly theirs. But on the day, much of the American youth vote found more interesting things to do than vote. (Similarly, Mark Latham tried and failed to score from comparison of his vigorous youth with Howard's doddery decrepitude.)
Kerry won a majority from voters under 29, but there seems to have been unpredicted leakage to Bush.
What the deconstructionist Left really needs to worry about, though, here as in the US, is the vote of today's under-18s – its heirs, if it has any.
Standing on a veranda with a bright six-year-old the other day, watching the rain fall, I was electrified to hear him say, "I'm not a mad greenie or anything but I just love rain."
We live in a benign climate when aesthetics and the senses win a few from ideology.
There is a subtle difference between a mule and a Democrat regarding heirs: The mule is biologically incapable of producing heirs, the Democrat systematically kills their heirs.
He probably thought that church-going folks would see that and think, "he's one of us!"
Which shows his contempt for the intelligence of Joe Average out here in TV-land.
The only mistake is that the writer assumed that President Bush "won" all the 11 states that passed gay marriage bans. Not true: President Bush lost both Oregon and Michigan and STILL those states passed the bans by comfortable margins. (It must have been those "homophobic Democrats" who helped these measures pass! /sarcasm.)
"One Sunday in Florida he went to church three times"
dats what you call 'Shake & Bake' style of gettin religion...
BTTT
Mad greenie bump!
Looks interesting. I will bookmark.
Since this starts off with a mention of the Church, I wonder what will happen when JPII dies ? (Sometimes I think "if" he ever dies....) It would be truly wonderful if a new conservative got into power, as opposed to some elderly "mule" who has been around long enough and accumulated enough influence to get into the top slot, and thereby slow down the conservative renewal of the Church for another pontificate. Of course, the Church may sink under Islam before then.
I think Bush and Howard realize that this is a race against time, and we don't have the leisure to fiddle around while Islam is breathing down our necks.
The Aussies don't need guns to defend themselves mate!
"I'm not a mad greenie or anything but I just love rain."
That kid has a bright future if he keeps that attitude. Conservation is something that conservatives everywhere should be looking at. I voted for Bush and I'm definately an enviromentalist. Theres a balance to be struck but liberals aren't even willing to look at balance.
BUMPping
The thing I think everyone overlooks is how your views may change as you get older. I know mine have definitely gotten more to the right as I got older. When I first voted at 18, I could have voted for a Democrat. Now at 50, I now find it extremely hard to vote for a Democrat because their values definitely are at odds with mine. So you've got to figure that the percentages of the <30 crowd are going to change as they get older.
I beg to differ.
Kerry also wanted people to believe he was a hunter and supported the 2nd Amendment because we saw him posing with a gun on tv. More contempt for the intelligence of Joe/Jane Average American.
This was an excellent anaylsis piece from our friends down under.
"Bluff" here is precisely the word. Part of the reason the left tends to react with such strident hysteria and sneering condescension when opposed in these matters is that deep down they know perfectly well that only a combination of bluff and bullying will maintain their intellectual dominance. They can take satisfaction that voters do not follow their dictates in the comforting and erroneous assumption of their own superiority, but find democracy an irksome inconvenience, to be disposed of at first opportunity. This is why no socialist government ever is truly democratic in any real sense.
What did Zell Miller say?? The party left me. Keep it up stupid Dems.
I'd hope that they get that right restored. I think that, like in the US, a rightward movement is underway in Australia.
Hehe...that's true. I was a moderate conservative at age 14. I am now a pretty staunch conservative. By age 40 I will probably be a nutcase far-right wacko...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.