After witnessing November 2nd's election debacle a few things crossed my mind. First off however, I want to come clean to those of you who know me personally; those who call me by "my government name" (you know who you are"). In the past, while in political discussions I may have given the impression that I wasn't extremely concerned about who "won" the U.S. Presidential election, because regardless of whom was selected for the White House, the American people, and indeed the world, would lose. To clarify, while I stand by this sentiment regarding the tightly controlled prospects of the U.S. elections, I certainly would have preferred for Bush to lose both the 2000, and especially the 2004 election. Now that it's over I have to admit, though I tried to convince myself otherwise, I cared more than I like to admit.

I knew I cared as I nervously watched the fiasco unfold as some online election watch websites shaded the states one by one red for Bush and Blue for Kerry. I knew I cared when I went to bed late Tuesday night (Wednesday morning) and slept poorly as I juggled the unlikely scenarios that would provide a Kerry Victory in Ohio. I knew I cared when I sat at work pissed off and with a tight upset stomach, as I watched the few Bush supporters in New York City scuttle around from place to place with those smug looks of satisfaction plastered across their faces. 

Understand I am under NO illusion about John Kerry, or the American single party, corporate duopoly, known as the Democrats and Republicans. I understand fully that both the Republicans and the Democrats in general are committed to the grand imperial project that calls for the continued domination of the world by American corporate interest using the unrivaled armaments of the American military. I heard and understood John Kerry fully in his speeches as he often criticized President Bush from the right on foreign policy and his persecution, excuse me, prosecution of the alleged "war on terror", though much of Kerry's "tough" rhetoric seemed more like insulation and posturing to deflect any attacks on his "toughness". It was as if Bush would say "I will hunt down and kill the terrorist", and Kerry would respond, "oh yeah, well I will hunt down the terrorist, stomp on their groins, rip their heads off, piss down their throats - and then I'll kill them". I heard and understood Kerry fully as he verbalized support for the unconstitutional rollbacks of civil liberties embodied in the Patriot Act, talked about putting more police on the street, and touted his credentials as a conservative. 

Understand I am also under no illusion about what likely happen in the 2004 election which to me reeks of massive vote rigging, vote tampering, and fraud particularly in the states of Ohio and Florida. The Republicans use of poll challenges and other vote suppression tactics was reminiscent of the poll taxes, literacy test, and intimidation of the Jim Crow and Reconstruction era; an era you would think most would like to leave in the past. Granted exit polls are not the gospel but they are usually quite accurate and reliable (and they were just about everywhere else in the country) especially when indicating significant leads, as they did indicate for Kerry in both states to the point that even many Republican TV pundits were remarking how good things looked for Kerry. This is in addition to the high voter turnout nationwide and hundreds of thousand new voter registrations which were more likely than not quite unhappy with Bush's first 4 years. For the election to turn on these 2 states both of whom used electronic voting machines, that can't be audited or checked and/or which were riddled with security flaws, in a significant percentage of their precincts is nothing short of suspicious. This is without even factoring the abnormally high rates of vote "spoilage" (discarded and uncounted votes) in black communities in the aforementioned states, as well as others. Add to that the fact that Bush's brother is governor of Florida, a state that never fixed many of their countless election problems from 2000's election and that already had a partisan Republican apparatus in place in key election related administrative positions. Meanwhile in Ohio, Walden O'Dell, the CEO of Diebold Inc., the company responsible for manufacturing many of the electronic voting machines used in this election, and who raised tens if not hundreds of thousand of dollars for the Bush re-election campaign, promised to deliver Ohio's 20 electoral votes to Bush in an August 2003 speech. If such improprieties were witnessed in another country, particularly one the U.S. government didn't like, such as Zimbabwe or Venezuela the cries of fraud from the American press would have been loud and rampant, but I'll leave it to you do to do the math.

Fear and Loathing

However fraud or no fraud, something more than a little disturbing happened Tuesday night. Approximately half of the people who had their cast votes counted, voted for George W. Bush. Despite all his lies about his little desert Vietnam (Iraq) and all the resulting deaths (estimated to be as high as 100,000 for Iraqi civilians, and more than 1,100 for US soldiers), the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, Enron and the California energy scandal, the terrible economy, the continuing loss of jobs, 9/11 and the subsequent cover-up, skyrocketing deficits, the Haitian Coup, and all the complete unaccountability and secrecy of the administration; near half the electorate confirmed the leadership of the sitting president. The fact that the election could even be competitive based the first 4 years of Bush Junior's reign is a damning and embarrassing indictment of much of the American electorate and the corporate mass media. 

The debates leading up to the election were a farce as both candidates basically agreed not to discuss any real issues facing the American people. Both the Republicans and the Democrats ran campaigns based on fear and the specter of terrorism, but in addition to the fear or terrorism which was the centerpiece of the Bush re-election platform, the campaign was galvanized and strengthened by appealing to the most reactionary and socially backward elements of the American electorate. Using a noxious concoction of racism, homophobia, Christian fundamentalism, xenophobia, and just plane, old-fashioned "White Male Rage", the Bush campaign was able to bring their base (no pun intended) support out in droves. And isn't it ironic that people in urban centers, in financial hub cities and the states most likely to be visited by a large scale terror attack such New York, California, Massachusetts, and Illinois voted overwhelmingly to oust Bush, while many of those in the "Red States", some of which largest terror target is their TARGET superstore voted overwhelmingly to keep him in power. Someone remind me to send the "Duke Boys and Boss Hog" Christmas cards this year.

Just looking at a map of Bush's electoral victories and how the states played out, Bush dominated the South and the Plain States though he still only managed a slim "victory". Estimates show that 88% of Bush's support came from White voters. His strength in these areas was based in his ability to seize on the anger of White men especially, many of whom are in the working class, but subscribe to a brand of racist scapegoat politics that blames the loss of "their" jobs, financial mobility, and the destruction of working class living standards, not on corporate and Capitalist exploitation, but on everything from immigrants, to "minorities", to feminist, to liberals, to homosexuals, and now - "terrorists". Many of these types, especially those with limited educational backgrounds, prefer Bush precisely for some of the reasons most of the world despises him. Bush, although from a privileged background, is perceived as not being very sophisticated, worldly, or "smart" - somewhat like them - but Bush portrays himself as a "tough guy" and a "good ol' boy". For them Bush is a comforting throwback to an error before "political correctness", when overt racism, sexism, and prejudice was the norm; to an era when even the common White American male felt he had power - even if this "power" can now only be expressed vicariously through American military aggression. For some strange reason these White men feel they have been treated really bad for the last few decades by other ethnic and social groups, who are usually in even worse predicaments. These White man are pissed off, and "they're not going to take IT anymore" - now if they could only figure out what "IT" is. But hey, you would probably be pissed off too, if you listened to and watched corporate, "Hate Radio and TV" all day, i.e. Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and the occasional Ann Coulter appearance.

Though neither Bush nor Kerry had much in the way of serious plans to address what really ails many of these angry white males, it's ironic that the election of George Bush will surely signal an intensification of the ruling class assault on the lives and living standards of these same people (if it wasn't for the fact that this intensification will also affect those who didn't vote for Bush, I might be tempted to conclude Bush supporters will simply get what they deserve). Just take a look at the damage done by the 1st Bush term, and that was during a time when Bush himself, as well as much of the country and world did not fully regard him as being a legitimate president. This time around we should all probably buckle our seatbelts, because as he said in his Thursday afternoon post-election press conference, he sees his re-selection as "political capital" and "he intends to spend it" - and I can assure you he won't be shopping at Walmart. As uncomfortable a reality as this may be for some, it's remarkable how little America has truly changed in broad areas of the country. Perhaps the Bush re-election chant should have been "400 more years, 400 more years".

"American Taliban, And the Negroes Who Love Them"

It shouldn't have even been an operable campaign issue considering both candidates oppose gay marriage, but the erroneous belief that voting for Bush would somehow prevent gays from having the legal right to marry likely played a large part in the turn out of Evangelical and other "Christian" sects as a voting block, as at least eleven states had measures on their ballot to make the practice illegal. I wouldn't be surprised if many of these same people, especially the men, who are so up in arms about the specter of homosexuals getting hitched rarely turn away when watching a pornography with lesbians in it - hell they probably masturbate to it - but America's schizophrenic and inconsistent sexual morality is another story. Many cited "moral values" as reasons for their support for Bush, proof positive that either they only selectively understand the teachings of Christ as they've heard them or that for these so called Christians, one's faith and beliefs are not embodied in their actions but simply being seen with a Bible, and claiming Christ as your guiding light. If Bush gets to appoint more than one Supreme Court judge during his 2nd term, he might even throw the "Christian Fundamentalist" gulag a major bone and appoint judges to try and have Roe Vs Wade overturned, stripping women of control over their own bodies. 

Sadly enough though, despite the fact that Bush saw no significant gains in votes among African Americans, there were no shortage of Negro preachers and hucksters eager to use their churches to help Bush garner support in the African-American community. Perhaps that shouldn't surprise me though because with the "Christian" Fundamentalist helping Bush stay in the Oval Office, they will undoubtedly be expecting something in return, and they will get it likely in the form of coerced "Christian" converts and funds from Bush's "Faith (Christian) Based Initiatives" - some of that money is bound to trickle down to such Negroes. Someone should write a book about it, they could call it "American Taliban - And the Negroes Who Love Them". 

This is a dangerous time we live in, when we have a Religious Fundamentalist president who claims "God" speaks to him personally. It's a dangerous time when the mood of the government and a significant portion of the public is that of anti-science and anti-intellectualism. Whether it be global warming or what methods are most effective at slowing the spread of AIDS, when this administration sees information out of line with their rigid and hard line ideology they simply ignore it and/or hide it from the public by removing it from their websites and documents, as if the facts cease to be the facts because one chooses to ignore them. Perhaps this is why Bush apparently feels so strong about his ability to fight "Islamic fundamentalist terrorism", because when you really look at it Wahabism and Bush's ideology are but two sides of the same coin.  

Having no real political or social platform to tout the extreme right, "Neo-Conservative", ideologues, occupying the White House have turned to the most base and extremist elements in contemporary American society for support. Conservatives and or Republicans, many less extreme than Bush's ilk, now control all 3 branches of U.S. government, meaning the legislative (House/Senate), judicial (Supreme Court), and executive (President). I would argue that in fact Bush, nor those behind him, are even Conservatives in many ways though they are more than happy to draw on that base for support. While conservatism is supposed to be characterized at least in part by fiscal austerity in government and distrust of government activism, it is clear that this government has no problem spending plenty of money and running up huge deficits, so long as the money goes to weapons manufacturers, the military, and corporate welfare. Nor do they have a problem with "government activism", so long as that activism is to curtail civil liberties and legislate "Christian fundamentalist" values into the lives of every citizen. I don't feel I am at all exaggerating when I that this country may well be in the early stages of outright fascism (though, this time it won't be selectively applied to certain "minority" groups). As it is was defined when founded around 1919 by Benito Mussolini, "Fascism is the merger of state and corporate power". It is a system of system of government marked by centralization of authority, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Simply take a look around you; could the domination of the American process by corporate interest and the wealthy be any more apparent? Bush's agenda is parroted uncritically in the mass media as were his lies leading to the Iraq war. You should expect more of the same when/if he attempts to attack Iran and Syria in his second term. How is it Bush was able to successfully run a campaign based on the belief that he is better equipped to protect the American people from terrorism, when his policies will obviously increase the prospect of such acts, and 9/11 happened on his watch - or lack thereof. Can anyone imagine how badly the media and the right would have skewered the President over 9/11if the sitting President had been from the Democratic party; a burning at the stake comes to mind.

Who You Calling Naive?

A lot of people laugh at Bush for his limited vocabulary and difficulty speaking coherently, especially when speaking spontaneously, but the situation is anything but funny. A closer examination of his verbal snafus shows a pattern, that as pointed by Mark Crispin Miller in his multimedia presentation "A Patriot Act", indicate Bush has most of his difficulty when speaking of concepts having to with compassion, empathy, or admitting personal faults. When he is speaking of war, retribution, vengeance, or punishing others he's a regular Shakespeare. What type of a man and/or administration are we dealing with when the President and his handlers believe themselves completely infallible? While I may have ridiculed more than a few Bush supporters and the like in my lifetime for being naive, perhaps it is all the rest of us, who are naive in that we don't see how high the stakes are nor what is happening right in front of us. Perhaps we were naive to believe that a group of people who attained their position through illegal means would now decide to "play nice" and allow themselves to be voted out of office. As much as I would like to just "shake these haters off" what continues to happen in this country, as illustrated by the 2004 election, is simply dangerous! Though it would have certainly signaled a limited change, the election of the Democratic Party candidate would have at least signaled domestically and to the world, that the American populace believed they needed a change. I shudder to think what another Bush term signals.

In the run up to the election, though I understood their sentiment, I was more than a little annoyed with many rappers, several of them of the "conscious" variety, namely Talib Kweli, Nas, KRS-1, and Dead Prez to name a few who openly endorsed a position of non-participation in the U.S. elections. I couldn't help but wonder if they knew, that as I once heard a wise man say, "those who don't DO politics, will be DONE by them!". I just didn't and don't fully how so many seemingly sharp people could get it wrong in unison. They acted as if participating in this admittedly and heavily flawed process was mutually exclusive to people being active in the community and organizing, or that the only office anybody voted for was President. Most of them gave a variety of reasons for their positions but mainly it boiled down to being lazy and the fact that voting wouldn't fix their problems, as if any SINGLE act could fix all that is wrong in this country and the world. And truth be told, if one refuses to do something as simple as go to a local polling place and pull a lever, then can they be expected to do the hard, and often thankless, work of organizing politically and socially? Voting, especially in the intentionally non-representative manner, it is done in the U.S. presidential elections (using the all or nothing format, of the Electoral College - a holdover from slavery) is but a small tool which has limited use, BUT it is not useless, though after yet another shameless debacle in 2004 it may be even harder to convince people of such ideas. Politically and socially we have to get to the point where we can proudly tell people that their vote WILL be counted and what they are voting for, NOT just what they are voting against. 

So go ahead and sulk for a day or two (I was finished Thursday morning). The fact that the most extreme, right wing elements of the ruling elite are still openly in the White House may or may not be such a terrible thing, in that it very well may wake a lot of people up, as it most certainly will if they try and re-institute the military draft. But stop the cowering and talking about leaving the country. In all likelihood none of us are leaving anywhere and more importantly we owe it to ourselves, the world, those that came before us, and those that will come after us, to stand and fight. This is NOT the time to be intimidated or back down from the progressive values, that will create a society based on human needs, social justice, and equality, not endless war, fear, social stratification, and hatred. Can we really leave the world's most dangerous and extensive military arsenal under the control of people, many of whom, would like to return the United States ideologically to it's former antebellum status, if not Europe's dark ages. If we can survive a 2nd Bush term, then there is probably no reason to go clamoring back to the hapless Democratic party across the board in 2008; what product of the extreme right we be left to frighten us back into the their arms? Swartzenegger? Giuliani? A cloned Attila the Hun? The Democratic Party's (in general) consistent drift to the right and reliance on the same corporate paymasters as the Republicans, as well as their refusal and inability to promote progressive politics has exposed their true colors and left them as a party without a base. It's well past the time to seriously begin the process of building political parties independent of the two wealthy elite and corporate, controlled parties that in general have nothing but the antithesis of the common person's interest in their plans. Indeed Bush is still the president, which means that the sun will still come up tomorrow and we've still got a whole lot of work to do. 

Released: November 5^th, 2004

The views and opinions expressed herein by the author do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of Playahata.com.