<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
All:<BR>
<BR>
Months ago in a V2020 post I predicted Bush would win in 2004. I had many reasons for this prediction, and just plain had an "intuition."<BR>
<BR>
I was hoping I was wrong, very very wrong, but alas...<BR>
<BR>
During Bush's first term in office we had a huge net loss of jobs, American's died in an unnecessary war that could continue indefinitely promoted with glaring falsehoods promulgated by the Bush administration, the national debt is up, up and away, and poverty rates and lack of access to affordable health care has increased. Though Bush ran on his strong positions on national security and the war on terrorism, the 9/11 attacks happened on Bush's watch, after he had been specifically warned about attacks with airplanes on American targets by terrorists, a warning for which Bush's response was less than the all out "let's stop this" that might be expected.<BR>
<BR>
So how did he win? Why would voters elect a candidate who failed to protect our nation on 9/11 with a weak response to intelligence warnings of the coming attack, has pushed policies that are lowering the standard of living for millions of Americans, who clearly represents the interests of the elite rich ((that segment in M. Moore's F. 9/11 where Bush is speaking to a group who he terms "the haves and the have mores" that he calls "my base" speaks volumes) at the expense of the middle and lower classes, and lied or told whopping falsehoods to the nation to push us into war, lies leading to such death and destruction that they render Clinton's falsehoods about an affair look like a Jr. High fib about necking in the janitor's closet?<BR>
<BR>
Was it the circling wolves commercial that implied Bush will protect us against the "wilderness" of terrorism for which we cannot show a moments weakness, such as voting in a new president? This political ad aired in the last days before the election amazed me for the psychology utilized, exploiting the most primitive fears that have allowed leaders to take control of peoples lives for thousands of years: we can postulate a tribal culture where a leader could have literally gained his top position by asserting she/he had the best strategy for keeping the wolves away. And also in general the fear of wildness in nature, that wolves can symbolize, employed to tap into and connect with the fear of terrorism, a technique of emotional manipulation short circuiting rational fact based analysis with a jolt of primal anxiety, still effective for manipulation despite the fact we have "conquered" nature to a great extent in our scientific technological world.<BR>
<BR>
Bush's victory can boil down to this simple analysis: regardless of all the debates about domestic and international policy, about deficits and lies, moral values and conviction, religious inspiration or the lack of it, social security and health care, jobs and outsourcing, terrorism and war, people believed he would keep the wolves away.<BR>
<BR>
More warm and fuzzy fairy tales can be expected soon...<BR>
<BR>
And Carl, life does go on, yes. But when I read your post, it immediately occurred to me that life does not go on for those killed, Americans and Iraqis, in Iraq under Bush's watch...<BR>
<BR>
Ted Moffett</FONT></HTML>