• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

As the days of campaign 2000 wind down to a precious few, some
observations are clearly appropriate.

First, it is rather remarkable to watch liberal ideologues in the
media and elsewhere desperately fleeing from the awful truth that George
W. Bush will be the next president of the United States. In the face of
a mountain of data which says otherwise, the airways are filled with
declarations that “the race is a dead heat … polls are all over the
place … voters have never been so undecided … it couldn’t be any
tighter … it’s down to the wire.”

Even as the inevitability of George W. Bush’s victory looms larger,
those in our society least likely to believe in miracles or divine
intervention, are, on this occasion, praying for them. Those prayers
will not be answered, and that secular institution, sometimes known as
the “mainstream” media, which has served for eight years as the voice of
government, faces the dread prospect of years of angst as the voice of
the loyal opposition.

It is not too soon to wonder why it is that candidate Gore chose to
run on a platform which emphasizes the failures of his own
administration. Why would a major political party in power for eight
long years run a campaign harping and caterwauling that over 40 million
Americans don’t have health insurance, seniors have to make a choice
between dog food and medical prescriptions, government school buildings
are crumbling, children are in crowded, unsafe government classrooms
with unqualified teachers, Social Security and Medicare will go bankrupt
unless reformed, the military is seriously underfunded, and poor people
and their children are falling further and further behind?

It makes one wonder how it is that Gore is judged the smart one. What
does this approach do but reveal that Democrats resurrect stock issues
such as education, Social Security and Medicare every four years, having
kept them alive by blocking reforms? The assumption is that the people
are too detached and too dense to catch on to the scam. But they ran the
scam one time too many.

Speaking of the intelligence factor, it is now fair to say that until
Bush outsmarted him in three straight debates, Gore hadn’t been beaten
in a face-to-face contest since that other “dumb” guy, Dan Quayle,
whipped him handily in the 1992 vice-presidential debate. The lesson
Gore didn’t learn is this: it is not smart to set yourself up to the
possibility of being humiliated by an opponent you have declared
“stupid.”

Although Gore flunked out of divinity school, dropped out of law
school, and had lower college grades than Bush, when comparisons are
made, it is Bush who is routinely underestimated. His humility and his
plain talk are viewed by the liberal elite as evidence of mental
limitations when in fact they are evidence of a refreshing lack of
intellectual snobbery. Underneath Bush’s folksy, disarming ways is a
degree at Yale University and a masters degree at Harvard. He is a
qualified military fighter pilot — and you cannot fake the skills,
judgment, and courage required to put a modern military jet through its
paces at 600 miles per hour.

We have had the opportunity to see how the candidates think. For
example, when Gore learns that many children are skinning their knees on
concrete surfaces, his impulse is to develop a government solution to
the problem, including mandatory knee pads for children under 12 years
of age, bicycle and scooter safety training, free band-aids at school
infirmaries, subsidized research on soft materials for sidewalks and the
establishment of a government agency to oversee the various “knee”
programs.

This is a paradigm for what is being done to everything else in our
society, our schools, our businesses, our property and our families.
Every human frailty, fear, temptation, grievance, need and exposure is
seized upon and exploited to justify government intrusions and
takeovers.

And when challenged that these various programs are unconstitutional,
Gore says that the Constitution is “a living document … that grows.”
This is to say the Constitution has no intrinsic meaning. It means
whatever the justices say it means. If left-minded justices are put on
the Supreme Court, they would never deny government its nanny duty to do
whatever is needed to protect its wards from themselves, from each
other, from accountability, from judgment, from fate and from skinned
knees.

Fortunately for America, George W. Bush understands the folly of
continuing our unconstitutional journey down a road paved with good
intentions. He understands, as did our Founders, that the ultimate
government “safety net” is a straitjacket.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.