Logic Times

Fear of Extinction

Posted by Aslan. Comments (2)

At the conclusion of Why Do They Hate Him So Much?, I identified the two main reasons George W. Bush is reviled by the left: Faith in God and, to be developed here, Fear of Extinction.

On this election hangs the future of the Democrat Party, and the Democrats know this. Hyperbole? Consider what is at stake on November second…

If the Democrats Win

The Bush Dividend

War on Terror: We are winning the War on Terror. Does this mean that we are entirely safe? Of course not. The death throes of fascist Islam will be dangerous and, for some, lethal. Everyone expects that there is another 9/11 in our future.

But death throes, after all, signify the end. Here, here, here, here, and here will give you a flavor for our emerging success in the War on Terror. Now, consider the media coverage that will commence on January 21, 2005 under a Kerry administration. Suddenly, the weekly car bomb will not be headline news. The leftist press in Baghdad will fan out like new-age soldiers in search of happy Iraqis, rebuilt hospitals, flourishing schools and supportive clerics. And, because these things exist now, they will easily find them in 2005. Reductions in American casualties, already underway, will be credited to a new policy and a new vision. Under the nuanced leadership of John Kerry, Iraq will be transformed on the screens and in the newspapers of the American public into a triumph. Then Afghanistan will quietly emerge, like a shy sister, from the shadows and be showcased as a blossoming democracy, nudged into prosperity by the steady international hand of President Kerry.

In other words, the successful execution of the Bush Doctrine will become Kerry’s achievement.

Media Survival: The mainstream media (MSM), currently in precipitous decline, will be revitalized under Kerry. When is the MSM most vulnerable to the excesses of its blind hatred for conservatives? When Republicans are in power. This is when the MSM goes to Rathergate extremes and mortgages the last shreds of its credibility. With a liberal in power, the primary activity of the MSM shifts from unethical attack journalism to polishing the liberal apple. In this capacity, they are less vulnerable. During a Kerry administration, the MSM, by the function of its very bias, will step back from the precipice of shoddy journalism and operate in a safe zone. Little Green Footballs and Brent Bozell will be left to point out that Kerry is getting a lot of undeserved credit, but not much else. Such activity is far less flashy – and less deadly – than Rathergate.

Judges: A Supreme Court with seven full or part-time left wing activist judges headed by Ruth Bader Ginsburg would go further to cement liberalism in our culture than any other event of this generation. Aided, naturally, by the re-Clintonization of the lower courts.

Economy: The economy is currently growing at the fastest pace of the last 20 years. With Republicans maintaining control of Congress, Kerry tax increases will not be allowed to interfere with the growth and expansion of this economy, which, of course, will be credited to him anyway.

2008: Consider the strength of a president, through no effort or vision of his own to be sure, who wins the current phase of the War on Terror and presides over a surging economy, a president who is lauded day in and day out in a revitalized MSM. Giuliani or no Giuliani, such a president would be the front-runner in 2008.

If the Democrats Lose

Extinction

War on Terror: Bush wins this phase of the war (of course, this war will never really be over). Even with media obfuscation and disinformation, the success of the Bush Doctrine will become apparent to the American public over the next four years.

Media Survival: As mentioned above, the MSM is most vulnerable when Republicans are in power. They are in decline now because they literally cannot see and will not acknowledge their own raging bias. After this election, the MSM will lose it. They will implode. (Actually, it will be quite entertaining.) With recounts, court challenges and impeachment hearings in our future, Mary Mapes journalism will become the standard, not the exception, thus providing meat for the new watchdog media (internet, cable, radio). Over the next four years of a Bush administration, the MSM will eventually become an object of satire and pity rather than a respected source of information.

Judges: A strict contructionalist future awaits us all with a Supreme Court headed by Clarence Thomas and supported by four true conservatives. The lower courts will take on a new constitutional orientation.

Economy: More tax cuts and greater security will continue to fuel progress.

2008: What a dividend for a Giuliani/Rice ticket in 2008! Furthermore, liberals will make the fatal error of nominating Hillary Clinton, who is unelectable. Democrats will not be looking at a serious shot for the White House until 2012 or even 2016. What will our courts, our economy and our security look like after 12 to 16 years of conservative management? Be still my heart.

The above scenarios are simplistic, of course. They account for little in the way of unpredictable events like 9/11 or Enron, and war is always unpredictable. And again, the death throes of fascist Islam will bring tragedy and further struggle. But this simplistic analysis reveals what is uniquely at stake on November second: a great prize – an infusion of life – awaits the Left if they win, and an ignoble decline awaits them if they lose. That is why, in large part, they hate George W. Bush – he is gatekeeper of their fate and they know it.

Comments

1: Cathy Prann-Misner

October 26, 2004 09:53am EST

I disagree that Faith in God is a reason Democrats dislike Bush. Afterall, Kerry is deeply religious himself as are most of Americans (84%, I believe) that includes Republicans and Democrats. Logicaly, that claim is flawed. However, I do agree that fear of extinction is a driving force. After the recent disappointments with the Bush administration, I started researching the possibility that I may vote Democratic this time around (first-time ever). I have found that Democrats are very hopeful and idealistic, but they do fear extinction simply because of scare tactics used by the Bush administration. I have also met Democrats who agree with the Democratic principles 100%, yet are compelled to vote for Bush because someone has convinced them that terrorists will attack again under Kerry. As well as appealing to many of our intellects, the Democratic party attracts the lower classes by appealing to their needs. In many cases, these people are also the lower IQ classes and are easily coerced and frightened. Fear is a very powerful force that can get someone to go completely against what they believe. That is why the Democrats fear extinction under Bush. Their positive messages are overshadowed by the fear fed by the Bush administration. But just as fear is powerful in driving unlikely voters to vote for Bush, it is also a powerful driving force in energizing unlikely Democrats to get involved. I have never seen a more dedicated, hard-working group of people. And surprise, surprise: many of them are religious leaders in my community and they hold prayer groups before rallies and outreach efforts.

{Aslan: Kerry is deeply religious? That statement alone cast doubts on your judgment in this matter.

My premise is not flawed, because you forget the key distinction I made in the post: "Let me apologize to any 'normal' Democrats reading this page. Of course, mainstream Democrats do not generally share this fear of faith, this mistrust of religion, this rejection of absolute morality. The elite do." Elite Democrats - the group composed of the hard-core idealogues, the press corps, academia, Hollywood - loathe and fear deep faith in God.

Second, I do not believe for a second that you are a lifelong Republican swayed by "hopeful and idealistic Democrats." The Democrats are many things in this world, but hopeful is not one of them. The world has never seen a more bitter, pessimistic group of opportunists that today's modern Democrat. You are revealed, Cathy, and that is OK. We still love you.}

2: Mark Riggio

November 1, 2004 07:40am EST

In response to Cathy Prann-Misner:

I find no publicly available credible evidence that the Democratic nominee is "deeply religious"; his prior experience as an altar boy wears poorly in light of his horrendous biblical misquotations and dubious positions regarding both stem cell research and abortion.
Your references to ‘lower classes’ and ‘lower IQ classes’ effectively refute your claimed Republican heritage. Class warfare is nearly the exclusive domain of the Democrat party; no Republican of my acquaintance classifies people in such a manner.
I agree that fear is indeed a great motivator! Justified fear, the type inspired by the 9/11 and other terrorist attacks, motivates us at a very primal level, that of survival. That such fear motivates people to vote for GWB is certainly not his fault; it is the result of the survival instinct. That is unless you actually believe that the US caused the attacks!
Positive messages do not win wars; successful (not necessarily speedy or cheap) military actions do. For me, the ultimate positive wartime message is that we’re winning and whatever the cost, we will prevail.
This is, I believe, why certain Democrats may vote for the President, their own survival instinct along with their unmistakable observation that no further attacks have occurred under his watch; not because someone convinced them they’d be attacked again if the Democrat candidate were to win.
Both parties tend to make appeals to voter’s intellects and to their needs. Again, given the context of 9/11, I refer you to Dr. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

I therefore encourage you to vote to reelect the President.

{Aslan: Well said!}