Thursday, November 04, 2004
Defining "Values"
I am really growing weary of the media spin that "values" decided this election. Of course, there's a very specific definition of what Republicans mean by "values," and, interestingly, they seem to cherry-pick the values that mean something to them and ignore other basic values of human life.
Republicans cynically used gay marriage ballot initiatives in 11 states (including Ohio) to turn out their right-wing, extremist, fundamentalist Christian base. Ironically, as an organization called Americans United to Preserve Marriage was trying to scare voters away from the so-called "liberal senator from Massachusetts," statistics were released on Monday that show that the state of Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the US (perhaps religious righties should focus more on keeping marriages of heterosexuals together and less on trying to keep two consenting adults of the same sex apart).
The right wing hypocritically rallies around hotbutton, "wedge" issues like gay marriage and abortion (and abortions, by the way, have increased over the last four years under Bush) but never register their disapproval for the slaughter of innocent children (not to mention over 1100 US soldiers) in Iraq. They re-elected a president who has the worst jobless rate since Hoover, the highest poverty rate, and the highest number of people without healthcare--does that sound like family values? What about a president who tries to cut healthcare for our veterans or to take away after-school programs for our children? Or to increase the amount of pollutants in the air we breathe? If you critically examine the policies of Bush, it's easy to see what "values" his policies embrace--they are the values of corporate America and his rich buddies and not the values of middle-class working America.
I will give Bush credit--he is very good at "talking the talk" and mentioning his values and pandering to the right-wing fundies by dropping the word "God" into his speeches. Now he needs to "walk the walk" by creating policies that actually demonstrate that he cares. In words versus deeds, Bush is all words.
A Victory for 'Values,' but Whose? (washingtonpost.com)
Republicans cynically used gay marriage ballot initiatives in 11 states (including Ohio) to turn out their right-wing, extremist, fundamentalist Christian base. Ironically, as an organization called Americans United to Preserve Marriage was trying to scare voters away from the so-called "liberal senator from Massachusetts," statistics were released on Monday that show that the state of Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the US (perhaps religious righties should focus more on keeping marriages of heterosexuals together and less on trying to keep two consenting adults of the same sex apart).
The right wing hypocritically rallies around hotbutton, "wedge" issues like gay marriage and abortion (and abortions, by the way, have increased over the last four years under Bush) but never register their disapproval for the slaughter of innocent children (not to mention over 1100 US soldiers) in Iraq. They re-elected a president who has the worst jobless rate since Hoover, the highest poverty rate, and the highest number of people without healthcare--does that sound like family values? What about a president who tries to cut healthcare for our veterans or to take away after-school programs for our children? Or to increase the amount of pollutants in the air we breathe? If you critically examine the policies of Bush, it's easy to see what "values" his policies embrace--they are the values of corporate America and his rich buddies and not the values of middle-class working America.
I will give Bush credit--he is very good at "talking the talk" and mentioning his values and pandering to the right-wing fundies by dropping the word "God" into his speeches. Now he needs to "walk the walk" by creating policies that actually demonstrate that he cares. In words versus deeds, Bush is all words.
A Victory for 'Values,' but Whose? (washingtonpost.com)
