The media is starting to reply

Today in the Houston Chronicle this is what is printed in the editorial

Angry White Male is now Bigoted Christian Redneck
By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

In 1994, when the Gingrich revolution swept Republicans into power, ending 40 years of Democratic hegemony, the mainstream press needed to account for this inversion of the Perfect Order of Things. A myth was born. Explained the USA Today headline: "Angry White Men: Their votes turned the tide for the GOP."

Overnight, the revolution of the Angry White Male became conventional wisdom. In the 10 years before the 1994 election, there were 56 Nexis mentions of angry white men in the media. In the next seven months, there were more than 1,400.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2898831

At the time, I looked into this story line -- and found not a scintilla of evidence to support the claim. Nonetheless, it was a necessary invention, a way for the liberal elite to delegitimize a conservative victory. And even better, a way to assuage their moral vanity: You never lose because your ideas are sclerotic or your positions retrograde, but because your opponent appealed to the baser instincts of mankind.

Plus ca change ... Ten years and another stunning Democratic defeat later, and liberals are at it again. The Angry White Male has been transmuted into the Bigoted Christian Redneck.

In the post-election analyses, the liberal elite, led by the holy trinity of The New York Times -- Paul Krugman, Thomas Friedman and Maureen Dowd -- just about lost its mind denouncing the return of medieval primitivism. As usual, Dowd achieved the highest level of hysteria, cursing the Republicans for pandering to "isolationism, nativism, chauvinism, puritanism and religious fanaticism" in their unfailing drive to "summon our nasty devils."

Whence comes this fable? With President Bush increasing his share of the vote among Hispanics, Jews, women (especially married women), Catholics, seniors and even African-Americans, on what does this victory-of-the-homophobic-evangelical rest?

Its origins lie in a single question in the Election Day exit poll. The urban myth grew around the fact that "moral values" ranked highest in the answer to Question J: "Which ONE issue mattered most in deciding how you voted for president?"

It is a thin reed upon which to base a General Theory of the '04 Election. In fact, it is no reed at all. The way the question was set up, moral values was sure to be ranked disproportionately high. Why? Because it was a multiple-choice question and moral values cover a group of issues, while all the other choices were individual issues.

Chop up the alternatives finely enough, and moral values is sure to get a bare plurality over the others.

Look at the choices:

Education, 4 percent
Taxes, 5 percent
Health Care, 8 percent
Iraq, 15 percent
Terrorism, 19 percent
Economy and Jobs, 20 percent
Moral Values, 22 percent

"Moral values" encompasses abortion, gay marriage, Hollywood's influence, the general coarsening of the culture, and, for some, the morality of pre-emptive war. The way to logically pit this class of issues against the others would be to pit it against other classes: "war issues" or "foreign policy issues" (Iraq plus terrorism) and "economic issues" (jobs, taxes, health care, etc).

If you pit group against group, moral values comes in dead last: war issues at 34 percent, economic issues variously described at 33 percent, and moral values at 22 percent -- i.e., they are at least a third less salient than the others.

And we know that this is the real ranking. After all, the exit poll is just a single poll. We had dozens of polls in the run-up to the election that showed that the chief concerns were the war on terror, the war in Iraq and the economy.

Ah, yes. But the fallback is then to attribute Bush's victory to the gay marriage referendums that pushed Bush over the top, particularly in Ohio.

This is more nonsense.

Bush increased his vote in 2004 over 2000 by an average of 3.1 percent nationwide. In Ohio the increase was 1 percent -- less than a third of the national average. In the 11 states in which the gay marriage referendums were held, Bush increased his vote by less than he did in the 39 states that did not have the referendum. The great anti-gay surge was pure fiction.

This does not deter the myth of the Bigoted Christian Redneck from dominating the thinking of liberals, and from infecting the blue-state media. They need their moral superiority like oxygen, and cannot have it cut off by mere facts. And so once again they angrily claim the moral high ground, while standing in the ruins of yet another humiliating electoral defeat.

Krauthammer is a Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist based in Washington, D.C.

Blue state media? What about MSNBC, I got cable down here in TX. Oh yeah, I forgot new media are liberals too. I guess we must be the "moral majority," I thought the neo-cons decided to take that title. Any way, being in a red state, please pass down some of your "moral superiority oxygen" down here so the people of Houston can breath some clean air instead inmoral polluted air. Lets reply with the facts.

email: viewpoints@chron.com
fax: 713-362-3575


Display:


Except the problem is that the Republican Party's (none / 0)

platform is based on big lie after big lie. And hate.

The only value I see inside that hollow shell is greed.

The rank and file may be fooled now, but it takes a huge amount of effort to maintain the facade.

Sonner or later, I pray its not in an economic meltdown (because one looks imminent) the facade will drop.

Christians and red state voters need jobs and stable environment for their families too.

If the Demos take the initiative in promoting innovative ideas now, even if they are shot down by the Repugs, the balance of power will eventually change as the truth sets in for the middle class. And I don't think that it will take long.

They have been sold out by the Republicans, who have given a green light to corporate pillage of every possible kind.

You can't let a fox guard the henhouse without repercussions.

by ultraworld on Sat Nov 13, 2004 at 11:09:11 AM EST

It's not just liberals - Karl thinks so too. (none / 0)

Karl Rove says 'Moral Values' Carried Bush

I do think it was part and parcel of a broader fabric where this year moral values ranked higher than they traditionally do," he said, adding: "I think people would be well advised to pay attention to what the American people are saying."
More links to articles about the rise of the Moral Values Voters in my diary entry. These people could be a real problem for the republicans.
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong --Stephen Stills "For What It's Worth"
by vj on Sat Nov 13, 2004 at 11:17:22 AM EST

Krauthammer (none / 0)

A tool. He's trying to explain why Kerry could win 4:1 when the issue is healthcare, social security, iraq, education and the economy, and Bush only wins when the issue is scaring people, raising homophobic fears, and staking out anti-abortion by 4:1 margins.

And yet, the agenda of the GOP is to reverse those policy issues.

by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Nov 13, 2004 at 03:10:07 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.