A nation of sissies and fuzzy math

By Mark Trapp
web posted November 13, 2000

When Ronald Reagan was sworn in for his first term on January 20, 1981, the first item he felt compelled to mention in his inaugural address was the "orderly transfer of authority as called for in the Constitution." He stated that, although this transfer of power from one leader to another was a "commonplace occurrence" in America, "few of us stop to think how unique we really are. In the eyes of many in the world, this every-four-year ceremony we accept as normal is nothing less than a miracle." As usual, he was right. This point is being driven home as I write. America, unlike the vast majority of the rest of the world, has always had orderly transfers of authority. That is, until Al Gore came along.

This past Tuesday, Al Gore lost the Florida presidential election by something like 1,784 votes. That's a tough way to lose such a big election, but a real man is not defined by whether he wins or loses. Then again, Al Gore is not really a man - he's a sissy. Did he take it in stride, keep a stiff upper lip, and congratulate his opponent? No. Instead, Gore has started a campaign designed to steal the election. In the days since the election, Gore has shown his true colors - and he is indisputably a sissy. No, wait. He's not even that - he's a half-a-sissy. By placing himself and his endless quest for power above the interests of the country, he has demonstrated what some of us have known all along - he is not fit to lead our nation.

For example, when Albert Gore, Jr., called George W. Bush back early Wednesday morning, he reportedly said, "we're going to wait this one out." When Bush asked him if he was retracting his concession of the previous hour, Gore responded, "You don't have to get snippy about it." You don't have to get snippy about it? What kind of man uses the word snippy? That single comment by itself should disqualify him from leading our country.

The next day, however, when the results showed that Gore had indeed lost Florida, and thereby the election, did he then decide to act like a man, and concede? No. Having 'waited it out' and still lost, Gore decided that now he would wait for the recount called for by Florida law. However, before the results of this recount were even in, his supporters had already started filing lawsuits and calling for another recount, this one to be done by hand. Furthermore, Gore has only called for this special 'hand recount' to be done in four counties - all predominantly Democratic. Apparently, Gore wants to keep the election officials in Florida counting until he likes their numbers. Perhaps this was what George Bush meant when he referred to Gore's 'fuzzy math' in the debates.

Compare that, taken by Gore and his supporters, designed to avoid the lawful results of the Florida election, with a response Gore gave in the first debate just over a month ago. On October 3, Jim Lehrer asked Gore what America should do about Slobodan Milosevic, who was then holed up in Yugoslavia, contesting the results of the election which he had presumably lost. Gore answered: "Well, Milosevic has lost the election. His opponent, Kostunica, has won the election. I think we should support the people of Serbia and Yugoslavia . . . and put pressure in every way possible to recognize the lawful outcome of the election."

Slobodan MilosevicPerhaps Milosevic should have just told Kostunica (and Gore for that matter) that he "was going to wait this one out." Then he should have called for recount after recount, and held press conferences where supporters babbled on and on about how the ballot was confusing, and that while they meant to vote for Milosevic, they had mistakenly voted for Toni Kukoc. I am sure Jesse Jackson would have gone right over there to drum up protesters and to call for a revote. Presumably, Gore would have had no problem with all of this, since he is now doing all of these things himself.

Gore's disgusting campaign to overturn the results of the election stems, I believe, directly from the impeachment of President Clinton. How so, you ask? Easy - the Democrats learned then that if you can confuse the issues and muddy the waters enough, then 'the people' will hold everybody equally culpable, and you can distract attention from your own problems. Surely, if you can convince people that 'sex' isn't 'sex', 'is' isn't 'is', 'alone' isn't 'alone', and that Ken Starr is the moral equivalent of Bill Clinton; you can easily get a couple hundred votes. The Democrats are trying to make the numbers themselves partisan - a majority, to them, depends on how you define 'majority.'

Besides, what are a couple hundred votes when the very world hangs in the balance? The Democrats are not going to let a thing like a mere number stop them. Just watch. They are already arguing that, by applying the Florida election laws in a fair straightforward manner, minorities and senior citizens have been disenfranchised. However, these rules are the only thing that save us from mob rule. For, if a losing side can challenge the results of an election based on what their voters meant to do, rather than what they actually did, every election is up for grabs.

Imagine if in 1992, after the election, voters decided that they didn't really mean to vote for Perot, but only did so because they were confused. After all, that clown captured nineteen percent of the vote. Once his supporters realized that he wasn't going to win, and that it was either Bush or Clinton, how many would have chosen Clinton? I'll wager most would have chosen Bush. However, the very foundation of America rests on the sacredness and finality of the electoral process. If you tamper with that, we might as well be living in Haiti. Thus, like it or not, Clinton won. Likewise, in this recent election, like it or not, Bush won.

It really is, as Ronald Reagan said, a 'miracle' that America has maintained the orderly transfer of authority for all these years. We need to remember that this has only been accomplished by everyone agreeing to the rules established by our Founding Fathers. As George Bush said to Al Gore in the last debate, "there are certain rules in this that we all agree to, but evidently rules don't mean anything." He didn't know then how right he was.

You wouldn't think it possible, but the Democrats will indeed convince many that the electoral college is nothing more than the construction of a bunch of white male slaveowners, designed to keep women and minorities from electing our president. Likewise, the Florida statutes regarding voting will be argued to be unfair or prejudicial, and the ballots too confusing. Al Gore just may steal this election.

If Gore does pull it off, then the real test comes. The people of Yugoslavia refused to accept Milosevic's attempt to avoid the rules. What will the people of America do? If we allow him to get away with it, we deserve to have that half-a-sissy Al Gore for our President.

Mark Trapp was last seen in Enter Stage Right with his piece Of puppy love and gorilla rights.

Current Issue

Archive Main | 2000

E-mail ESR



1996-2020, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.