The last thing I recall was enumerating my reasons for endorsing John Kerry for the office of President. Many of these were simply reasons for ridding the nation of the pestilential administration we are unfortunately to be saddled with for four more years. I seem to recall likening the Bush crew to the Nazis. Perhaps a bit of clarification is in order.

I by no means intend to imply that the two equate ideologically, merely that the methods employed to seize and hold power are eerily similar. End of disclaimer…

THE ELECTION

“I swear that nothing is good to me now that ignores individuals” -- Walt Whitman

The results seem to have been as close as predicted, only two percentage points separating the rational from the ludicrous. There have been recounts in the decisive state of Ohio, and if the results are to be believed, Bush won by a few thousand votes. It seems he’s always winning by a few thousand votes.

I have to admit to a bit of discomfort at the fact that in both the election of 2000 and 20004, every single time a serious recount was done, Bush lost votes while his opponent gained. The fact that Democratic districts were allocated fewer voting machines than Republican districts, resulting in long lines, ten hour waits, and many voters leaving before voting, is also cause for concern.

Immediately following the election, Bush stood up at a press conference and declared a mandate. This was as predictable as it was silly. Someone ought to force the guy to carry around a pocket dictionary.

I guess all this could be construed as “whining;” some recent writers of “letters to the editor;” said whining being a peculiar trait of Democrats. I prefer to interpret it as concern for the future of my country and the welfare of its citizens. Some would further enjoin us to “get over it” and to “get on with our lives.”

Would that I could!

Call me a whiner, but having my country governed by a single party bothers me. Having my country’s foreign policy steered by incompetent and arrogant ideologues bothers me. Having a domestic policy that cares more for corporate profits than its citizen’s health and well-being bothers me. Questionable election practices in the world’s leading democratic republic bothers me. The parade of mangled bodies sneaked back into the country by the privileged twits who lied us to war bothers me.

I’m sorry, I will not get over it, and will get on with my life only when some balance, dialog, and sanity is at last restored to my government.

The single aspect of the past election that I am proud of is the fact that my Landsmen came through once more. Jews voted overwhelmingly for Democrats. It seems that no matter how assimilated we as a people become, no matter how comfortable, wealthy, or successful, we vote as if we can still hear through the years the echo of the handle of a Cossack’s whip as it bangs against our farmhouse door. Well done, my friends!

A recent letter writer maintains that the Democrats have “lost their direction” and have nothing to offer the “farmers who grow our food” as well as “the workers in many blue collar jobs who grind out our goods and services in the face of withering and growing challenges.” He goes on to say that these aforementioned are “hard-working, sensible people who reject moral relativism and political equivocation.” Moral relativism? I seem to recall that the Supreme Court has established that community standards decide what is and is not moral. I thought that was pretty much moral relativism. Guess I’m wrong.

What planet do folks like the writer live on? Farmers who grow our food? What farmers? The ones who now earn their livings stocking the shelves at K-Mart for a Republican-opposed minimum wage? Large agricultural conglomerates that have replaced the family farmers our letter writer waxes so nostalgic about now grow our produce. The blue-collar workers he refers to do indeed face withering and growing challenges. These challenges are the direct and logical result of the policies and priorities of a morally bankrupt Republican party who has never and does not now have their interests at heart. My challenge still stands: point to one single piece of progressive social or economic legislation or policy that directly benefited working people that was put forth by Republicans. Now do the same for Democrats. Lopsided, isn’t it?

The following from Woodrow Wilson in 1913 points to a Republican party that has not changed its focus in almost a century:

“The tariff question, as dealt with in our time, has not been business, it has been politics. Tariff schedules have been made up for the purpose of keeping as large a number as possible of the rich and influential manufacturers of the country in a good humor with the Republican party, which desires their constant financial support. The tariff has become a system of favor. It becomes a matter of business, of legitimate business, only when the partnership and understanding it represents is between the leaders of Congress and the whole people of the United States.”

The letter-writer goes on in the same vein with a strangely surreal appeal to Jews: “Surely as a Jew, you understand what that is all about. I wouldn't be writing you today, as a child of Holocaust survivors, if somehow hope and faith did not prevail over fear and despair.”

Now here is an interesting straining of logic! Does the writer seriously believe that “hope and faith” saved his parents? I think not. It was the mindless acceptance of a doctrine of hate and bigotry coupled with the triumph of nationalism, over the sense and innate goodness of an entire race of people that put his folks in the camps in the first place.

It was the combined force of the Allied Armies that saved them.

If the writer could go back to Germany in 1932, would he advise the Germans who opposed the election of Hitler to “get over it” and “get on with their lives?” If the writer is lucky enough to still have his parents with him, I would suggest he talk to them about the methods by which a small lunatic fringe in Germany used to be able to consolidate its power. Then study the ways in which elections can be stolen (in one Nazi-controlled plebiscite in the thirties, thousands of political prisoners in a German concentration camp apparently voted for the National Socialists! Then again, no recount was asked for, so I guess the results were valid…).

In short, the Democrats have always been able to view the citizens of this country as individuals. One can empathize with an individual. Republicans on the other hand have been able to morph into champions of the working class only around election time. To their credit, they have sold their stale and amoral product to an electorate which seems bound and determined to return them to power again and again, in the manner of a person who, having shot himself in the right foot, responds to the pain by taking careful aim at his left…

RED STATE, BLUE STATE

An interesting bit of statistical trivia from the New York Times Magazine. It seems that all states are not equal as far as revenue sharing is concerned. The larger Democratic states such as New York and California actually receive less in per capita federal spending than they contribute. In contrast, the Republican states such as Alaska and Wyoming receive about 30-40 percent more than they contribute. In other words, the blue states subsidize the red states. Reading this, I suddenly became converted to the conservative mindset: Let’s all keep our money and end federal handouts! Let’s all pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and become personally responsible the way the Alaskans have done! In fact, per capita federal funding in Alaska has grown by more than 50% to almost $12,000 last year, far and away the highest in the nation. I love it!

SOCIAL SECURITY

Here we go again. Having received his 2% mandate from the Alaskans, Bush and his reshuffled minions are looking for ways to pay for their “War to Free the Iraqi People.” Their rheumy eyes have predictably settled on one of their favorite whipping boys, Social Security and the greedy freeloading seniors who ride the gravy train. Their opening salvo is just as predictable; Bush has asserted that there will be a three trillion dollar shortfall in the fund. He neglects to mention, however, that his figures are projected into infinity, instead of the foreseeable future. In short, he has created a crisis where none exists. But hell, scare tactics worked so well in the last election, why change a winning formula!

Make no mistake about it; The Republicans don’t want to fix, restructure, or modernize social security. They want to kill it. They always have. They never wanted it in the first place. They don’t want it now. They never will.

Bush is similarly actively engaged in solving the health care crisis (the one that Clinton predicted and the Republicans scoffed at; the same crisis that most major insurance companies are now asking the Federal government to step up and do something about). His solution? Tort reform! He has evaluated the problem and decided that the doctors are paying way too much in insurance premiums, and that if these premiums would shrink, so would their fees. Presto! No more health care crisis! Rather than working with the insurance companies to find a way to reduce fees, he wants to limit punitive awards to $250, 000. Seems reasonable. If a surgeon cuts off the wrong leg, a quarter mil should see you through the rest of your life (that is if you, as lots of seniors and uninsured are doing, go on half doses of your meds and eat less. And too, you would only have to pull yourself up with one bootstrap, not two)!

Perhaps he’s right. I mean, after the oil crisis in the seventies was over, gas prices went right back down to below a dollar per gallon, didn’t they? So too, I guess will medical and drug costs. Well, maybe not.

There has been a push among some democrats to establish a dialog with Republicans, congratulate them on their victory, and work with them. To them I say good luck. If the tenor of the recent “Letters to the Editor” is not an indication of how an outstretched hand will be received, perhaps the following will prove predictive:

When the Democrats recently opened a debate on the flawed electoral process, it was commented upon by John Feehery, a spokesman for J. Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House. He maintained that “they” were “really just trying to stir up their looney left.” Our loony left? There you have in a nutshell how our efforts to work hand in hand with the crowd in power will be received.

Finally, in the “Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely” department, I submit the following from the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 - Porter J. Goss, the new intelligence chief, has told Central Intelligence Agency employees that their job is to "support the administration and its policies in our work,'' a copy of an internal memorandum shows.

"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," Mr. Goss said in the memorandum, which was circulated late on Monday. He said in the document that he was seeking "to clarify beyond doubt the rules of the road."

The CIA is supposedly an independent agency charged with gathering intelligence and submitting objective evaluations of that intelligence to the executive. What does the “support of the administration and its policies” have to do with its charter? Or the truth?

Nazis.

Once again, thank you for your indulgence, and a happy and healthy New Year to all my Gantseh Megillah friends!