An Apology To My Children

It is fairly disconcerting. I mean, what message are we sending to our children?
A first lady who should be going to prison is rewarded with election to the US Senate. A Governor who tragically loses his life in a plane crash comes from
behind after his death and is elected to the Senate from Missouri. A Vice President
who has been flaunting his immunity to the law on the model of his mentor President
garners a popular vote plurality on a campaign of fear and fiction. Ibid for hosts of
liberals all around the country who ran on class war and deception and falsehood
and dependency
.
And the Governor of Texas who wins Florida by a slim margin of about 2000 votes
is said to not deserve to win it and election to the White House but his opponent
who 'won' Wisconsin, Iowa, and New Mexico by almost similar measures is supposed to deserve election. The media was more than anxious to take Florida
out of the Bush column over the issue, and would not put Oregon in the Bush
column though he was ahead by 30000 votes there, even as they chalked up
Iowa and Wisconsin and New Mexico to Gore.

It is curiously and yet truly amazing. It is not clear the morning after the election
just how the whole thing will play out. What I do have to do is explain to my
children.

But you will ask how can you say that Hillary deserves punishment? And if you
have to be told that, it can only be because you do not want to know or will not
accept what is clearly and abundantly in evidence -- from Vince Foster to Whitewater
to FBI files to illegal fundraising to Mena to the entire cover-up. And if you have to
be told about the public sector dependency problem, if you have to be told about
the 'victimization' problem, if you have to be told that it is not alright to kill the unborn, if you have to be told that Clinton and Gore had nothing to do with the economic prosperity or the reduced deficits, if . . . but all of that only begins to scratch the surface.

It is becoming an issue as to whether rational expectations is rational voting.
And faith in the citizenry is on tenuous grounds when citizenship is replaced
by subjectivity. And to much too great an extent we are being turned into a nation
of subjects, of peasants in training.

It may be worse than that portends. The voting patterns in the election may outline
an emerging new party system built around dependency and paternalistic government. They certainly clearly display a divided nation. Color the states as they
went in the election and you see the rising tide of sectionalism. Listen to the media
commentators hark on how Bush carried the 'Confederacy.' What are they saying?
Listen to the exit poll results as to how there is a gender gap and a race gap in
the country over the Republican's wicked policies which reach to starve children
and let old and sick people die and encourage bigots to commit the most heinous
crimes.

All is not lost. Bush may yet 'win' and he will have a Republican Congress.
But then the mudslingers will really start. And you think they have been bad
up to now? On top of that, the things they have whined the most about are
among the best characteristics of W. His 'bad' points are where he is on common
ground with "them."

Fiction and fraud and friends and fear. It is not even that I love George W. Bush
so much but that I hate what I have to tell my children. Hell, I don't even know where
to begin. Of course, we all have begun already -- by having to deal with the queries
of six year olds about the oral sex they heard about on the news. Who let the dawgs
out?

What seems to have happened over the weekend before the election
was that the Nader vote "switched" in substantive ways to Gore
-- if there was that level of Nader vote in the first place.
And the so-called "uncommited" vote went for Gore largely on
the DUI dirty trick scam. I say scam because these same people
think that Clinton and Gores' foibles were not important.
Polling services that didn't poll over the weekend therefore
missed these things.

Still and all, Bush's election will give the liberals a new
cause to whine about. They had been talking of the electoral
vote victory which Gore would hope for even if he lost the
popular vote. Even Al Gore himself in October was touting
the necessity of abiding by the constitutional formula.
Neither was it a problem when the liberals and media used
the Electoral College to 'argue'Clinton's 'mandate' in 1992
and 1996. It was used to gloss over Clinton's minority vote.

This is not the first time that a candidate won the election
while losing the popular vote. The most recent example of this
was the 1960 election when votes for the Alabama Democrat party
with Robert Byrd as its candidate were counted for Kennedy
even though Kennedy was on the ballot and did not get those
votes. Without them, Kennedy did not have more votes than
in Alabama or nation-wide, and won the electoral college votes
from Alabama and nation-wide.

That 1960 victory also had the assistance of the Daley machine
in Chicago to give it Illinois. They also carried Texas with
the LBJ machine. Without that, JFK would not have won.
But the Democrat machines across the country have regularly
engaged in such practices. Without that, neither Carter nor
Clinton would have been able to win the electoral votes in
1976, 1992, or 1996.

This time, their efforts simply fell a little short. They could
not pull it off in Florida, perhaps due to the fact that it is
on Jeb Bush's watch.

Bush has been credited with 271 electoral votes (including
the 25 from Florida, although they are trying to deprive
him of those and victory). In 12 other states, they were
able to 'steal' the electoral votes. These can be grouped
into three categories on the size of the pluralities.

Gore carried Wisconsin by 6000 votes, Iowa by 5000, New Mexico
by 9000, and Oregon by 2000. In these, Gore pirated 35 electoral
votes, and if Gore's 'challenge' of voting in Florida were
to succeed, there would be re-examination of the votes in
these four states.
State mull over possible recounts

But Gore carried four other states by very narrow margins.
(BR) Maine (4) by 32000 votes
Minnesota (10) by 55000 votes (and a Ventura 'endorsement')
Delaware (3) by 43000 votes
Washington (11) by 90000 votes

Larger pluralities were put together in several larger states
on the backs of political machines which have regularly pulled
off such coups.

California (54) by 1.2 million votes
Illinois (22) by 554000
Michigan (18) by 200000
Pennsylvania (23) by 200000

California experienced some of the most egregious fraud,
with massive voting by illegal alien non-citizens.
Not only does that eliminate the alleged Gore plurality
nationally, but it involves 180 electoral votes stolen
from Bush (35, 28, and 117 in each category).

With the first category of states, Bush should have 306
electoral votes. The 28 from the second group would give him
334, and the final group brings his total to 414.
And one would suspect that the Democrats are opening a real
can of worms for themselves in seeking to flip Florida to
Gore, because of what occured in the others, and has been
going on in them for years.

As it happens, the Republicans won a trifecta anyway.
They have not held sway over both houses of Congress
and the White House since 1954. So, there is reason for hope.
And there is also the Supreme Court.

But hold. It is not over yet. Gore and his cohorts are not
finished yet. They will try to steal Florida, as they have
at least Wisconsin, Iowa, Oregon, and New Mexico. And this
time, the Republicans may be up for the fight. The best
strategy for the liberals would be to let it ride because
it could just blow up in their faces. The dawgs may end up
biting the wrong hands.

return to beginning of ejps
return to beginning of this issue