Decius wrote:
] The number one issue was "moral values" (and I'm going
] to continue to put that in quotes because I think its an
] oxymoron), but the number two issue was Terrorism. Where Kerry
] failed was by not focusing on Terrorism.

No, from my read of things, the top issues were Terrorism and the War in Iraq. Every place I heard people debating things, that's what came up. Not moral values.

] I'm angry because Gay Marriage has taken center stage in the
] Moral Values discussion, and its not reasonable to interpret
] people's position on that matter to be anything other then
] straight up hate.
  . . .
] These people don't oppose Gay Marriage because the
] bible tells them so. They oppose Gay Marriage because they
] don't like gay people.

Decius, the main hate I'm seeing here, is from you. I have a lot of gay/TS friends, and I'm sensitive to anything that's stamping disapproval on them, but I have *not* seen the gay marriage issue as something saying, "We disapprove of gays." I haven't heard any one saying that the "Queer Eye" show is appalling and that its participants need to be arrested. I haven't heard anyone saying that gays need to be put to death, or even that gays should be prohibited from living with each other or caring for each other. Instead, I see the issue as saying, "I'm not gay, but if gays want to be that way, fine. If they want to live together, fine. If they want a legal way to be responsible for each other, via a civil union, fine. But I draw the line at marriage. That's a hetero institution, and I'm not giving them that too. If gays don't like that, well tough." Or in other words, I don't see the gay marriage issue as the conservative right being aggressive against gays -- I see the *gay* culture having been increasingly aggressive and, yes, activist about getting acceptance in mainstream culture, and at some point *of course* mainstream was going to push back and say, "Okay, this far and no further." It doesn't mean they hate gays.

] Tell me I'm nuts. Tell me that this is a radical, emotionally
] charged interpretation of this election that has no
] relationship to what really happened. Prove it! I WANT someone
] to talk me down from this perspective. I see an election that
] was about jingoism and hate. And it pisses me off. I don't
] want to think that this is my country. But that seems the most
] straight forward way to interpret events.

Okay, how's this: I think you're presenting an emotionally charged interpretation of the election. I think you've, for the moment at least, got an "us and them" mentality, where anyone who disagrees with your values is being perceived by you as wrong, stupid, mean, uneducated, dangerous, uninformed, or at the very best, misguided. Or in other words, I think that you're exhibiting the very behavior that you're accusing the other side of. Are conservatives and evangelical Christians automatically evil, in your world view? Isn't it remotely possible that someone can be devoutly religious, *and* also be smart, educated, informed, caring, and respectful of other ways of life?

RE: The Values-Vote Myth