THE DEBATE GOES ON AFTER THE ELECTION
Interesting discussion started by Tony Perkins going on at AlwaysOn:
Where Do the Democrats Go from Here?
Back in 1978, at 20 years old, I was the statewide student campaign manager for Jerry Brown’s (a.k.a. Governor Moonbeam) re-election campaign. As part of my job, I hosted the entire Democratic slate in a huge outdoor rally at UC Davis the day before the election, and I still have the photos to prove it. By 1980, I was voting for Ronald Reagan, and I have voted Republican ever since.
My political philosophy is very complex and is based upon a combination of many factors. I studied western European history and American politics in school and have been a political activist since 13. I worked for a start-up bank for the first 5 years of my career, then became a media entrepreneur, TV commentator and editorialist. Most significantly, I am a husband, a father of three daughters, and a practicing Roman Catholic.
While I have voted Republican since 1980, I believe that the Viet Nam war was a bad idea. I am against the death penalty and have never owned a gun. I believe in legalizing drugs and prostitution and affirmative action for the socio-economically disadvantaged. I also believe that the Federal government should maintain a “safety net” for kids who want to go to school, and old people who run out of money.
In other words, I am not a “survival of the fittest” Republican who is merely looking for lower taxes. I believe in the basic idea that if you have been given a lot (as I have, as our nation’s has) then you/we owe a lot. According to my view, this is not a choice, but a (dare I say) moral obligation. (full post)
ANOTHER view by Daniel Terdiman at Wired, "Longing for a Blogging Candidate." HatTip to Instapundit who wrote:
This article echoes something that I've said before -- if Kerry had hired Joe Trippi, he'd probably be President-elect now.
Of course, the notion of using blogs to make a rapid response to the Swift Boat Vets' allegations might have stumbled on the Kerry campaign's big problem, which is that it didn't have a very good response. But more active use of blogs would at least have kept them from being taken by surprise.
LASTLY a great commentary by Charles Krauthammer at The Washington Post:
'Moral Values' Myth
The Washington Post
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, November 12, 2004
In 1994, when the Gingrich revolution swept Republicans into power, ending 40 years of Democratic hegemony in the House, the mainstream press needed to account for this inversion of the Perfect Order of Things. A myth was born. Explained the USA Today headline: "ANGRY WHITE MEN: Their votes turn the tide for GOP."
Overnight, the revolution of the Angry White Male became conventional wisdom. In the 10 years before the 1994 election there were 56 mentions of angry white men in the media, according to LexisNexis. In the next seven months there were more than 1,400.
At the time, I looked into this story line -- and found not a scintilla of evidence to support the claim. Nonetheless, it was a necessary invention, a way for the liberal elite to delegitimize a conservative victory. And, even better, a way to assuage their moral vanity: You never lose because your ideas are sclerotic or your positions retrograde, but because your opponent appealed to the baser instincts of mankind.
Plus ca change ... Ten years and another stunning Democratic defeat later, and liberals are at it again. The Angry White Male has been transmuted into the Bigoted Christian Redneck. (full article)