US Election 2004

As always, whenever Paul Blair puts his hands to the keyboard, the results are interesting.  For an understanding of his disintegration and misintegration reference, see the post on Leonard Peikoff’s endorsement of Kerry.  The conclusion of Blair’s piece on his surprising ballot choice is below:

The two presidential debates I saw brought the "disintegration vs. misintegration" nature of this election almost to a perceptual level.

Kerry was comfortable with concrete facts and avoided abstractions; his "flip-flopping" is evidence of his disintegrated approach. Bush spoke in bromidic slogans as if reciting memorized lines, showing the anxiety of someone whose abstractions have no foundation in perceptual concretes. It frightens me that this kind of mentality is running our country; at least Kerry's mental process has some point of contact with reality.

I don't want to see Eliot Spitzer as Attorney General, or a massive new government-subsidized healthcare program. I would have liked to see tort reform and Health Savings Accounts and the ability to invest Social Security taxes in private accounts. But in my judgment, Bush is a threat to certain crucial and fundamental American freedoms that we have so far managed to preserve; that outweighs everything.

Because New York is solid for Kerry, and because Bush is not campaigning on religion, I will vote for Bush in the name of American self-assertion--to reduce any pacifist "mandate" Kerry might claim.
But I wouldn't if I lived in any state Bush might actually win.  [P. Blair, Anti-Kerryites Against Bush, Capitalism Magazine, 11/1/2004] 

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this

• #1 Comment from owls4gina 
  11/3/04 12:25 PM | Permalink

  Well now we have four more years of beheadings to look forward to, can we nominate Bush to be first?