BY YROSENZW@LAW.HARVARD.EDU
To the Editor,
Lee Rudofsky’s column announces that there is “true true meaning [to] the resounding results of the 2004 election.” I challenge him to explain that meaning to anyone who does not agree with agendas of the wealthy and the religious right.
No, Republicans were not “all” fooled into voting Republican, as Mr. Rudofsky comfortingly posits out. But most will find the Bush adminstration’s agenda terrifyingly far to the right.
Mr. Rudofsky himself, a self-professed “pro-gay marriage and anti-death penalty” voter will not doubt be crushed to find out that it is physically imposible to argue that the current Bush administration will advance either of these no-doubt-deeply-held policy beliefs.
More disturbing to me is that a population of voters who support abortion rights are finding the Supreme Court’s doors pried open to anti-abortion ideologues by the political whipping of Senate Judiciary Chair-to-be Arlan Specter and the drum beat toward ending the filibuster.
Was the “meaning of the election” much more than the achievement of these sorts of ends, sponsored by the religious right? More than the reform of the tax cut for the wealthy? What are the benefits to rest of the “big tent” who have never seen a dime trickle down from tax cuts for the wealthy and who experience their religion at a community level?
Yoni Rosenzweig