Flibbertigibbet

You Ask and I Answer

Reader Liberal Fury writes in response to my post "Republicans Make Me Sick":

Why in the hell would you vote for that illiterate s.o.b.? Honestly! You seem to be a person of relatively high intelligence. Why lower yourself like that? And why help screw the rest of the country?

If you think I'm intelligent, why do you assume that I'd make a decision with the intention of lowering myself and screwing the rest of the country?

Also, Bush isn't illiterate. He has written his name on several bad laws in this two terms so far, so I know he is at least functionally literate.

All kidding aside, the reason I voted for Bush is because I assessed him to be the lesser of the two evils.

If we follow the logical path of either of the major parties, we end in some form of totalitarianism, so I wouldn't even attempt to say that I think either are headed in the right direction. However, I think either could be headed in the right direction.

The reason I chose Bush is because I think it's more likely that the Conservatives will get more liberal in their social policies than it is that the Liberals will get more conservative in their economic policies. For some reason, it's easier to pursuade people to make "feel good" decisions than it is to make rational ones.

A "feel good" decision that the Republicans could make would be to allow gays into the military. The arguments against it are silly on their face and the arguments for it tend to go like, "But gays have a right to serve their country" or some such. Few people are pursuaded by the sound arguments for allowing gays into the military like "gays can shoot people just as well as straights." So, people are usually pursuaded to allow gays into the military because they don't want to be seen as harsh, uncaring, or judgmental.

Slowly, I think the Republicans will come around to the right policies. They may get there by the right or the wrong reasons and I think the wrong reasons tend to serve rhetoricians better in most cases.

The Democrats, however, are very unlikely to change economic policies because the "feel good" reasons argue against it. What on earth feels good about free market economics? Nothing. It means people have to either sink or swim. But every rational reason in the world supports free markets, but none of the feel good reasons do. So, the Democrats are that much less likely to turn from the error of their ways.

So, why did I vote for Bush over Kerry when I think they're both morons? Because even though I think either moron can make the right decision for the right reasons, it's more likely that they will make right and wrong decisions for the wrong reasons and given that Kerry uses the wrong reasons against right decisions and Bush uses the wrong reasons for the right decisions, I chose Bush.

I do not agree with Bush's wrong decisions or his wrong reasons for right decisions. I don't think it is helpful that any decisions are made for the wrong reasons. I think both candidates are wrong, wrong, wrong. But given that I had to choose, I chose the one most likely to make the right decisions but for wrong reasons.

An interesting turn of events in the form of the national budget shows why you can't count on either party BECAUSE they both use the wrong reasons to make decisions. Just as the Democrats are pursuaded against free markets because it feels good, so are the Republicans. This doesn't show that voting for Bush was bad any more than if Kerry had been elected and made mistakes that it would have shown that it was a bad decision to vote for Kerry. What it does show is that Bush is making bad decisions and probably for the wrong reasons. We knew THAT going into the discussion, though. It was bound to happen.

The other reason I voted for Bush is because Democrats often make me throw up in my mouth.

So, that's why.

Now, don't come on my website and insult me again or I will ban you. I'm not even kidding.