The role of moral values in the Bush victory has been the subject of countless stories. The New York Times reports that Bush’s chief political adviser, Karl Rove, said that “opposition to gay marriage was one of the most powerful forces in American politics today and that politicians ignored it at their peril.” That’s fascinating, coming from a paper that crusades for homosexual marriage and runs “wedding” announcements of homosexual couples. Obviously, the media are ignoring this “powerful force” of opposition to homosexual marriage, and have done so for years.
In all 11 states, Rove noted, anti-homosexual marriage amendments or measures won by considerable margins. But The Times reported that Rove said “he was not certain that the votes necessarily helped Mr. Bush to defeat Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. He noted that Mr. Kerry had won Michigan and Oregon, where the amendments passed by large margins.”
What the Times failed to note was that if Bush had campaigned explicitly for traditional marriage, rather than just speaking in general terms about family values, he might have picked up more votes in or even have carried those states. In fact, Bush’s opposition to homosexual marriage was diluted one week before the election when he gave an interview to Charles Gibson of ABC News and endorsed homosexual civil unions, which are simply a version of homosexual marriage under a different name.
Rove told the Times, “I think people would be well advised to pay attention to what the American people are saying.” We hope by “people” he meant the news media. At last count, 534 newspapers run announcements of homosexual unions and “marriages” as if they are comparable to traditional marriages between a man and a woman. The media have tried?and failed?to create the cultural conditions in which homosexual marriages would be accepted as legitimate.
At a November 15 event at the Heritage Foundation, William Bennett was supposed to speak on the “moral mandate” of the elections. He cited not just passage of the anti-homosexual measures, but the fact that Alaska, a relatively libertarian state, voted against decriminalizing or legalizing marijuana?despite the fact that the pro-marijuana side got far more money than the movement to keep it criminalized. That vote was 57-43 against pot.
On the other hand, the pro-marijuana lobby reports that the majority of so-called “marijuana law reform initiatives” did pass on November 2. To cite one example, Montana became the 10th state to legalize so-called medical marijuana. People think they are being compassionate when they vote for such measures but they are being conned into believing that marijuana, which is more harmful to the body than tobacco and causes mental problems as well, somehow has medical benefits. This measure was financed by the Marijuana Policy Project, which is funded by the billionaire atheist George Soros. That wasn’t a victory for moral values. Soros didn’t come out of November 2nd a complete loser. And despite joking about going into a monastery if Bush won re-election, Soros will not fade away from the political scene.