LET’S BE SYMPATHETIC NOW. America’s red-state patriots are having a tough time these last few days. Watching Fox News on election night, for example, a liberal might have been forgiven for assuming Megyn Kelly was undergoing an on-air colonoscopy.
She looked that grim.
Meanwhile, Karl Rove couldn’t believe his lying eyes. When Ohio went blue you thought Brit Hume might have to use a stun gun to silence the gibbering fool.
On talk radio, the morning of November 7, Rush Limbaugh had to break the bad news to all patriotic Dittoheads. The black guy was still in the White House. The “entitlement class,” he grumbled, had spoken. The “takers” had elected Obama. Now the “makers” would suffer hideous fates. Like seeing their marginal tax rates rise by 3%! Maybe 5%!
On Thursday Michael Savage assured listeners that, no, their side didn’t lose. Obama had sinister ties to some computer company somewhere that somehow allowed him to rig the election and turn reliable red votes blue.
Only Savage, Savage noted, was reporting the story. Something to do with the liberal media bias. Or Hitler.
Down in Texas, Peter Morrison, a Hardin County Republican and county treasurer wanted no part of the awful news. Tea Party stalwart and Ron Paul supporter, Mr. Morrison wanted to know: “Why should Vermont and Texas live under the same government? Let each go her own way,” he said, invoking the spirit of an earlier age, not 1776, exactly. More like 1860. If the “maggots” voted for Obama, let those “maggots” suffer the consequences. He really called other human beings “maggots.” And by “maggots,” Morrison meant Asian Americans and Hispanics who cast ballots for President Obama and carried him to victory.
Bud Kennedy, writing for the Fort-Worth Star-Telegram broke the story first, adding this reassuring note: “Oh, did I mention that Morrison was chosen by former State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy to help screen Texas public school textbooks?” That ought to make us feel better, don’t you think?
A great guy like Morrison—helping decide what Texas public school students learn! What could be wrong with that?
SO, HOW DID THE GOP LOSE? Did it have anything to do with the fact that they didn’t turn out their side? In 2008 John McCain lost the popular vote by ten million, 69-59. Four years later, with Republicans poised (according to all their pundits) for a landslide win, and Obama actually losing 8 million votes, they pulled in only 58 million themselves. In fact, it might salve Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan’s wounds and sober the right-wing to remember that their side has carried the popular vote only once in the last six tries.
What about this idea that the “takers” are seizing control? Asian Americans, pretty much the “perfect” minority, well-known for their work ethic, went for Obama by something like 74 to 25%. Americans with college degrees split down the middle. According to exit polls reported in USA Today, 46% of this group favored the President while Romney captured only 52% of the “makers” vote. It seemed even “worse” if you looked at the surveys for voters who had done post-graduate study. Here the maggots were truly squirming. Fifty-five percent of the most-educated Americans said they supported Mr. Obama. Damn physicists and geologists and historians with their PhD’s and “taker” mentalities! Even the underclass, the “takers” by any Rush Limbaugh-Michael Savage-Peter Morrison-47%-definition, defied classification. True: according to a report in the New York Times, Obama won their support by about 28 points, roughly 64-36. But that would still mean more than a third of the “takers” follow the Tea Party Way.
What about all those “taker” females, voting Democratic, 54-44%, forgetting that if they were raped it would be God’s will they become pregnant? And Rick Santorum and Paul Ryan’s will that they not have access to an abortion?
Were Latinos really so stupid as to vote for Obama, 69% to 30%, even after right-wingers in Arizona gave them the right to be stopped and asked to prove citizenship by showing their papers? Not to vote for a party that wanted electrified fences? Not to understand that the Dream Act was tyranny in disguise?
Did young voters stupidly choose to support a man who rammed “socialized medical care” down their throats, so they’d be covered on their parents’ insurance policies until age 26, thereby threatening the “socialized medical care” of people over 65, the retired “makers” in the very same country?
THESE WERE ALL HARD QUESTIONS and might involve soul-searching and thoughtful analysis to answer.
For now, however, the truth as seen through right-wing eyes was clear. Rush and the boys considered the numbers. They studied the democratic process. They looked at the changing makeup of the U. S. electorate.
And they saw maggots.