While I've pretty much gotten over last Tuesday, I, like many others, feel the need for soul searching. As such, I've determined to read Thomas Frank's book "How the conservatives stole the heart of kansas" or some such title. As well, I intend to single handedly reinvent my party as exactly what it already is, only maybe presented a bit more like MLK jr. would have presented it.

However, just to help describe my sense of frustrated sadness, I've decided to print the following article from the humor webpaper, The Onion.

WASHINGTON, DC—The economically disadvantaged segment of the U.S. population provided the decisive factor in another presidential election last Tuesday, handing control of the government to the rich and powerful once again.

"The Republican party—the party of industrial mega-capitalists, corporate financiers, power brokers, and the moneyed elite—would like to thank the undereducated rural poor, the struggling blue-collar workers in Middle America, and the God-fearing underpriviledged minorities who voted George W. Bush back into office," Karl Rove, senior advisor to Bush, told reporters at a press conference Monday. "You have selflessly sacrificed your well-being and voted against your own economic interest. For this, we humbly thank you."

Added Rove: "You have acted beyond the call of duty—or, for that matter, good sense."

According to Rove, the Republicans found strong support in non-urban areas populated by the people who would have benefited most from the lower-income tax cuts and social-service programs championed by Kerry. Regardless of their own interests, these citizens turned out in record numbers to elect conservatives into office at all levels of the government.

"My family's been suffering ever since I lost my job at the screen-door factory, and I haven't seen a doctor for well on four years now," said father of four Buddy Kaldrin of Eerie, CO. "Shit, I don't even remember what a dentist's chair looks like... Basically, I'd give up if it weren't for God's grace. So it's good to know we have a president who cares about religion, too."

Kaldrin added: "That's why I always vote straight-ticket Republican, just like my daddy did, before he lost the farm and shot himself in the head, and just like his daddy did, before he died of black-lung disease in the company coal mines."

Kaldrin was one of many who listed moral issues among their primary reasons for voting Republican.

"Our society is falling apart—our treasured values are under attack by terrorists," said Ellen Blaine of Givens, OH, a tiny rural farming community as likely to be attacked by terrorists as it is to be hit by a meteor. "We need someone with old-time morals in the White House. I may not have much of anything in this world, but at least I have my family."

"John Kerry is a flip-flopper," she continued. "I saw it on TV. Who knows what terrible things might've happened to my sons overseas if he'd been put in charge?"

Kerry supporters also turned out in large numbers this year, but they were outnumbered by those citizens who voted for Bush.

"The alliance between the tiny fraction at the top of the pyramid and the teeming masses of mouth-breathers at its enormous base has never been stronger," a triumphant Bush said. "We have an understanding, them and us. They help us stay rich, and in return, we help them stay poor. See? No matter what naysayers may think, the system works."

Added Bush: "God bless America's backwards hicks, lunchpail-toting blockheads, doddering elderly, and bumpity-car-driving Spanish-speakers."

THE END

Now I don't necessarily believe and agree with everything written in this column intended entirely for humorous purposes. I just think the right has somehow won the war of words. A friend of mine recently stated she voted for the president who stood on the platform of Values, Morals, and Beliefs. The crazy bit is that I really don't think she did. She believes she did. It seems over half of America may believe it has. I just think they may be wrong. I feel we're being hoodlummed, shnookered, bamboozled, and all of those other words that mean being taken for fools. The democratic party stands for rights, equality, health, education, and hope. The democratic party is the party that stood behind MLK jr. as he dreamt of a world where black children and white children could eat at the same table. We champion the weak, the poor, the underpriveleged, the uneducated, and the unappreciated. Our presidents have gone on to be humanitarians. Republican presidents have gone on to be criminals and oil barons.

Perhaps I am overstating the case, but, excusing the minutia, it is a valid point.

And so I am left to wonder. Where did this disconnect come from? We still champion these ideals, yet the general public seems to disagree. Is it because we don't support a constitutional ban on gay marriages? It's possible, yet to support such a ban would be to go against the very fiber of the democratic spirit. There is a reason the first ten amendments were called the Bill of Rights, rather than the Bill of Persecution. Is homosexuality immoral? I'm pretty sure it isn't. Was it immoral for black people to work with white people years ago? Some said it was. Was it immoral for women bare ankles 100 years ago? I'm gonna hazard a guess of yes. Was it immoral for people to drink alcohol 80 years ago? Once again, I'll say... yes.

Guess what? The only time we elliminated a right of the general public using a constitutional amendment, we overturned it. I'm pretty sure democrats believe the MOST immoral thing in the world is hating those of us who do things that we dislike, when those things hurt absolutely no one.

A second possibility exists. Maybe the disconnect happened 20 years ago, when abortion became legal. Maybe it happened 15 years ago, when democrats generally began to agree that they'd support women's rights. I've already discussed this issue, so I won't go too far into it; however, let me say again, for the first time: making something illegal doesn't stop it, and stopping something doesn't always involve making it illegal. It's just a thought, but it certainly feels like an important one. Remember, Clinton was the first president we ever had who was openly in favor of choice, yet under Clinton, abortions decreased annually. This may not make sense, but I suggest you think about it, long and hard.

The third possibility is a little more depressing, because it hangs the guilt squarely upon my social psychology friends. Maybe the republican party really did hoodwink everyone using the tricks of social psychology better than the democratic opposition. In essense, maybe the republican leadership had better screenwriters and a better director. If that is the case. If the nation is being run by far right money grubbers whose only real agenda is tax cuts, cheaper oil, richer rich and poorer poor, and scare tactics, then perhaps we do have a problem.