Fear, Fags, and Ratfucking
Well, at least the voting is over. I spent the last 3 days out of state (plus a couple days of prep time), all on my own dime, trying to make sure that everyone who wanted to vote got to vote, regardless of their party affiliation. Looking at the election results this morning, I am reminded that right around half of American voters choose to cast their vote for a man who would happily toss me and most of the volunteers I worked with into a re-education camp if he got the power to do so.
Lesson learned. That is the last time I play good liberal. If half of the country wants to live in the South in 1905 (if they even know that's what they actually voted for and what that really means), that's one thing. But they're forcing all of us to live there. And that I will fight.
So what's the alternative to "good liberal"?
Posted by: Hal | Nov 03, 2004 at 07:48 AM
Canadian
Posted by: Rainey | Nov 03, 2004 at 10:36 AM
An election result like this makes me wonder if I'm crazy and the rest of the country is sane. It can't be the other way around, can it?
Posted by: feitclub | Nov 03, 2004 at 01:45 PM
feitclub, it's the other way around. Seriously.
Posted by: Shaula Evans | Nov 03, 2004 at 05:26 PM
I'll tell you one thing that this election cemented for me and that's that hate is vastly more powerful than love. I've always clung to the idea that no matter how cynical I've become on that subject, other people - religious people - are better than me and they have that love thing knocked. Love may matter in individual lives but as far as large populations go, hate wins every single time.
The alternative to 'good liberal' is to fight hate without hating but without thinking that love is the answer.
Posted by: eRobin | Nov 04, 2004 at 07:27 AM
"Secession" to Canada may be an option worth looking into.
Posted by: aerdrie | Nov 04, 2004 at 10:10 AM
PeeDub,
Whut the high holy hell organization were you working through? Our small-but-wiry Zemblan cohort was canvassing Clark County, NV, and all the Dem groups there (Kerry campaign, ACT, MoveOn, etc.) had targeted lists of voters who were likely to lean Kerry's way IF they voted. The trick, obviously, was to get as many Dem leans as possible to the polls and leave everyone else the hell alone.
The pursuit of bipartisanship is admirable in principle but not in practice (not at the moment, anyway). As Mr. Norquist has taken some pains to instruct us.
Posted by: Simbaud | Nov 04, 2004 at 12:59 PM
Simbaud,
I'm pretty sure that PW was working with Election Protection.
Posted by: Abby | Nov 04, 2004 at 01:24 PM
Yep, EP. But like I said, no more good liberal.
Posted by: paperwight | Nov 04, 2004 at 01:29 PM
Not to be nosy, but which state were you working?
Posted by: Simbaud | Nov 04, 2004 at 03:01 PM
Are we the only western country that has a two party system? I hope we aren't serving as a model democracy for others.
Posted by: cm | Nov 04, 2004 at 10:06 PM
Personally, I think we should start a long running attack on the religious right. Something along the lines of "Christian works not Christian jerks".
These bastards took that gloves off twenty years ago. Its time we did the same.
m
Posted by: Mark Greene | Nov 05, 2004 at 06:32 AM
cm, the US actively exports American diplomacy--and I don't (just) mean Iraq-style "liberations," either
Posted by: Shaula Evans | Nov 05, 2004 at 06:39 AM
Hey PW - it's your friend in Chicago. This is my first post. I am a middle school teacher, and on Monday many teachers in the school were talking about the various "mock elections" that they were going to hold on Tuesday to give our students an authentic taste of America. I asked many of those teachers about their "ballots", and found out that every teacher was offering the same two-choice ballot throughout the school: Bush or Kerry. Our school (and I can only assume most schools throughout the country) taught millions of children about the TWO men running for president and the TWO political parties that were facing off. Yeah - a few kids had heard of Nader, and even fewer knew of the Independent Party. But, our tax supported public school system in this country is training millions to think that there are only two political parties. What can be done? Is this legal?
Posted by: Steven Smith | Nov 06, 2004 at 06:28 PM
Paperwight . . . you didn't learn your lesson. You still don't understand what freedom really is. Freedom is not won through battle like a bully on the playground. It is acheived through understanding not the "chosen" word of tolerance. Only opression can be won when the majority of the people disagree with the outcome, and the majority of the people "DIDN'T" disagree.
But you don't want to understand me do you? You hate me and what I believe, and hate is what fuels your desire and your passion.
And you don't even know me. You hate me because of what I believe. I don't want to tell you how to live, I just want to be able to live "MY" life the way I choose. And if I choose to read the bible, as opposed to burning the flag, you should show the same respect. Just as I would do for you. That is the only path to true freedom.
Other than words, what do you truly feel passionate about? What do you donate to each month? What part of yourself have you commited, each month of your life? If you truly want this to be a better nation, what have you done to make that happen? Other than spouting your opinion? I share what little material things I have. How 'bout you?
Like it or not, democracy is majority vote. And the majority has spoken.
Posted by: Edward James | Nov 24, 2004 at 08:29 PM