Journal WIAKywbfatw's Journal: There's nowt as queer as folk... 5
That journal title, by the way, is an old proverb from the north of England. For those of you that require a translation, it means "There is nothing as strange as people". And, as people go, there are few in the public eye as strange as George Walker Bush.
Sir Winston Churchill, a leader who stood up the worst horrors that man can inflict upon his fellow man, yet who never lost track of the principles for which he fought, once described encryption as "a riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma." Had he lived in our times, he might well have used those words to describe the 43rd President of the United States.
Here is a man who knows that he was the beneficiary of the most unconvincing election decision in American history; an election so close that he had his brother Jeb, Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanon, butterfly ballots, chads, illegal disenfranchisement, and who knows what else to thank for his eventual "win" in Florida and elevation to the presidency.
A man who knows that he gained fewer votes nationwide than Al Gore in 2000 and who'll have to perform even better than he did then if he's to win this time around. A man who knows that his opponent this time around won't be afraid to come out swinging, and who'll have more to defend than to attack.
A man who's record in office has had few highs (the overthrow of Saddam Hussein the only notable one), but many lows (September 11, the PATRIOT ACT, Camp X-Ray, the at large status of Osama bin Laden, an illegal invasion that's turned into a quagmire even after he proclaimed "Mission Accomplished", the non-existance of the Iraqi WMDs, the deterioration of US-World relations, rising unemployment, a tax cut that really only benefits the rich, failing schools).
In short, a man who needs every vote he can get.
Yet what does this man do? He attacks gays by calling for a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriages, a mistake that's potentially fatal to his re-election campaign.
By most conservative estimates, three percent of Americans are gay. That's three out of every hundred people of voting age, Dubya, just in case you weren't sure. That three percent is, broadly speaking, more educated, more affluent and more politically-aware law-abiding citizens than the norm. In short, gay men and women are smart, rich, astute and likely to vote. So why would you do something that's guaranteed to get them turning out for the other side?
If every gay man or woman plus, say, just one of their non-gay friends or relatives felt strongly enough about this issue and voted accordingly, then that's six percent of the electorate you've just lost on one issue.
Six percent in what will probably be a close race? I'm sorry, Dubya, but that's probably the ballgame right there because you've just misfielded the ball on an issue where you couldn't gain votes (most people have bigger priorities when they vote, and even those that'd vote for you solely because of your same-sex marriage stance would probably have been voting Republican anyway) but sure can lose them.
Sure, if I'm a gay man I'd worry about the economy, terrorism, etc. But I'd worry a hell of a lot more about a President that wants to make me a second class citizen in my own country. Heck, even non-gays must be worried about where all this is leading: first Camp X-Ray, the abuse of the Constitution, privacy and due process for even American citizens, proposals to legally discriminate against gays, what's next?
Bush's advisors must know all this. So why let the idiot open his mouth on the issue? Why not just keep shut? If had to say something then why did he have to say something so explosive? Couldn't he just say he was against it?
Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps waivering voters will see this as an example of "moral leadership" from a former alcoholic and cocaine user who was busy dodging National Guard duty whilst others of his generation were busy dodging bullets.
I doubt it though. And I'm sure that there are some in the White House that share that view, which makes me wonder why, why, why did he turn something so small into something potentially so big. Just what's going on in that head? To me, it's a riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. How this can help him more than it hinders him is hard to see. What a strange man.
It just goes to show, there's nowt as queer as folk.
Some thoughts (Score:2)
Secondly, I have to say this apparent mass homophobia going on right now is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. What do you mean "What will the children think"??? Maybe they don't care about the politics of sexuality as much as our supposed leaders.
Re:Some thoughts (Score:2)
The average member of Bush's cabinet will save $42,000 this year thanks tho those cuts. Dick Cheney alone is expected to save $116,000. In 2001, median household income in the US was $42,228. Ie, the income of half the households in the US was below that number and the income of half th
you're making an assumption (Score:2)
Re:you're making an assumption (Score:2)
But of those that bothered to vote, not all gay people will have voted for Al Gore last time. A fair proportion of them will have voted for Bush. Remember, these are smart, rich, astute voters. They're people who mostly have good educations, good jobs, money but no kids or other dependants so aren't as concerned about crumbling high schools or the state of social services. If you remove the sexuality
An American perspective (Score:2)
I couldn't agree more with what your saying about George W. in general however I think your understanding of American politics is a little bit off. I don't say that to offend -- only to encourge discussion and point out where I think your wrong.
Sir Winston Churchill, a leader who stood up the worst horrors that mank can inflict upon his fellow man
I do love this statement. Churchill stood on a cliff with his entire people after France had fallen. It was the lowest of lows for a proud people with a rich