A W for W

And a sigh of relief for the American public. America has spoken, and it wants more of the same.

I must say I respect John Kerry now more than I ever have. He could very well have dragged this on for days and days, but now he loses with a great deal of dignity. You simply can't cough at a 3M win in the pop. vote with 60% of the population going to the polls. Kerry ran about as solid a race as could be expected of a Senator, and ran a reasonably clean race, all things considered. Not spotless, mind you, but reasonably clean. Even in the debates, when he took issue with the President's stances, even in accusing him of making mistakes, he did so in a professional and not-overly-condescending manner. I think one of the high-points of this entire election year was seeing the candidates actually compliment one another during the debate process.

People like to make quite a stink about our electoral system, most noticeably in an election year, but we really don't have that much to complain about, especially when compared with most of the rest of the world. Granted, there are other systems that may have their alternative benefits, but we've got a decent enough system. To complain about our system is a bit like whining about not having a Ferarri when you drive your M-class to work every day. Deal with it. The greatest thing about our system is that it routinely forces even the highest powers to defend their actions, be it in war time or in peace.

I didn't hear either speech but I look forward to digging them both up this evening. I read this line from Kerry, which is cool: "In American elections there are no losers, because whether or not our candidates win or lose, the next morning we wake up as Americans."

What will be interesting now is to see if the left has to continue in the conspiracy-theory-knee-jerk-reaction to conservative victory, or if they can honestly examine their short-comings and turn things around in time to start gaining some ground back in 2008. Its going to be another rough 4 years for them, especially if significant change comes in the Supreme Court.

I do find it heartening that all 11 gay marriage amendments were solidly backed. Here in NYC, the typical leftist attitude is to scoff at the stupidity of a "homophobic evangelical heartland" (or whatever you want to call it). This response is the continuance of a minority movement that clearly misses the point. People aren't afraid of homosexuals. It's not a phobia. It's a definition. Marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman, and has particular privileges that are attached to it. A society that begins to pollute such a basic concept cannot, for very long, hold out against limiting any other challenges to it's definition. Once you grant that the definition shouldn't discriminate against sexes, how sacred will the age issue be? Pretty soon its not an issue of "between man and man," but now it becomes "between man and boy." And what about exclusivity to two people? Maybe that would even go before the age issue - no longer "man and man" but "man and women" or "man and men." You either draw a line or none at all. In this election, at least on this issue, logic spoke, not ignorance.

Here's to 4 years of peace and prosperity (and the Repub. majorities waking up and starting do something about the uncontrollable deficit).