Moral Values Malarkey

[PSU84]

CBS News November 5, 2004

Moral Values Malarkey

By Dick Meyer.

Let’s try to snuff this election’s new Big Theory before it becomes Conventional Wisdom, although it’s probably too late. The subject matter is "moral values." The theory is this: Kerry lost because he was very unpopular with people who believe moral values are the most important issues. This group of values voters is growing and Democrats are doomed until they can win them over. While the nexus of issues boiled into the words "moral values" certainly were a big factor in this election, it’s being exaggerated partly because of the oddities of the poll on which the premise is based and partly because the Big Theory conforms with what Republican strategists want you to believe. As for the notion that that the legion of values voters is exploding, I don’t see it.

<SNIP>
Next problem: what are these moral values? Now, we all have a sense of what is meant by moral values in this election: gay marriage, stem cell research, late-term abortion, prayer in school and several other similar issues. What it really refers to is being against gay marriage, stem cell research and late-term abortion. Being adamantly for stem cell research would exclude you from being part of the moral values crowd. And in the code of politics and rhetoric, the phrase "moral values" really now just refers to a set of Bush’s positions. So the exit poll question is even dumber; of course people who think moral values are most important will go for Bush.

<SNIP>
Is it a crisis for the Republicans that the huge, 45 percent slice of the electorate that describes itself as moderate went for Kerry 54-45? Is it a crisis for the Republicans first time voters went 53-46 for Kerry? Doesn’t that make an ominous sign for the future?
It’s argued that the Democrats are in hot water because the rural voters who made up 16 percent of the electorate went 59-40 for Bush. Is it a crisis for the Republicans that the 13 percent that live in big cities went 60-39 for Kerry?

<SNIP>

This years' failure is not intrinsic to what the Democratic Party is or what it might stand for. Family values were a very big deal 20 years ago in the reign of Ronald Reagan. (One of the more visible advocates was Democrat Tipper Gore.) Yet Democrat Bill Clinton then won two terms. The so-called values voters’ crisis can be solved by the right candidate. It’s not brain surgery. The Democrats’ inability to find such candidates and then let them lead, however, appears to be a very difficult condition to cure.



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/05/opinion/meyer/main653931.shtml

[indigobusiness]

1. Instead of leading the world to a new and better place.

These people are determined to go forward with eyes backwards. To fondly navigate the waters of historical failure with destinations burdened by closeted catastrophies. Ask so many of the victimized children of the moral majority what took place during the dark nights in the darkened homes of their darker pasts, if you want to see the future.

[Martin Eden]

2. my VOTE was based on MORAL VALUES

I sent this brief LTTE to the Chicago Tribune in response to an article about how this election was won by those who voted on moral grounds:

I'm one of the millions of Americans whose vote on November 2 was guided by moral values and our children's future. I voted for American jobs and against burdening the next generation with crushing debt. I voted for a healthy environment and a sustainable energy policy. I voted for an America that inspires other nations to follow, not one that incites hatred and condones torture. I voted for freedom of speech and religion, for scientific inquiry, and for Constitutional liberties. I voted for John Kerry.

[PSU84]

3. Great letter !! n/t