By Irene Starkehaus -
During the 1988 Democrat Convention held in Georgia to nominate Michael Dukakis for the presidency, America was coming off one of the most popular and successful presidencies of the 20th Century and the Democrats were in a quandary as to how to woo voters back to the dark side of the political spectrum. Reagan had been unusually successful and probably could have won a third term had he been allowed to run.
Regardless of growing memory lapses, he truly was loved and respected by a large percentage of the population. I doubt that he would have done worse in that state of diminished capacity than his successors did. At any rate, the Democrats were then what the Republicans are now. Paralyzed…without a clue as to how to ever win the White House again.
Seeing as how Michael Dukakis had sort of a Brezhnevian vibrancy about him (and that certainly wasn't helping the progressivist sell job, don't-cha know) the Democrats decided they needed to focus on optics rather than on the substantive failures of socialism as a way of winning back the White House. Instead of taking an inventory of what had worked during the Reagan Administration and adapting their strategies to meet America's socio-economic needs, the Dems figured that the more pertinent concern was how to make Old Glory photograph better. The flag was transformed from red, white and blue to pink, cream and baby blue because the muted colors looked better on TV.
The convention went off without a hitch (unless you count Bill Clinton being booed for trying to upstage the nominee...oh, 1988 America! If only I could go back in time and warn you. There's so much you need to know.) Michael Dukakis was duly nominated and the American flag looked absolutely fabulous on television in her baby doll makeover.
As the story goes, somehow the Republicans learned of this most grievous abuse of our centuries old symbol of sacrifice for freedom, and they used the alteration of Old Glory to illustrate the Democrat Party's disconnect from heritage in favor of pop culture's transitory form-over-substance excesses. Republicans coined the phrase "pastel patriotism" to exemplify what the American Left fails to grasp about the birthright of American liberty and that description stuck.
The term "pastel patriotism" was in no small way contributory to the defeat of Michael Dukakis in 1988. Bush the Elder was elected on the promise that he would stay the course and not raise taxes. Alas, Bush the Elder stumbled out of the White House gate by going back on his tax promise. He wanted to show that not all Republicans were money hungry, cold hearted scalawags like conservatives supposedly are. The move backfired. Proving once and for all that country club conservatives lack the courage of their convictions, Bush was characterized now as a lying, money hungry, cold hearted scalawag and Bill Clinton handily defeated him in 1992.
It could very easily be argued that the singular decision by George Bush the Elder to concede conservatives supposed lack of compassion has led to every subsequent socio-economic devolution into Leftism. Let's face it, it's hard to defend principles of constitutional liberty and free market capitalism when the Republican Party's self-appointed royal family broadcasts to the world that they think liberty is a mean bully.
So that brings us to 2015 as marriage joins the endangered species list in wake of last week's Supreme Court ruling.
The sanctification of conjugal onanism was perhaps the sincere objective of half of the three percent of Americans who are gay and legitimately interested in an exclusive relationship and lobbying for the United States government acknowledge it.
For the rest of the 53% of people in favor of sacramental, committed masturbation as has been determined by telephone surveys with a random sample of 1,000 adults out of the 250 million that self-identify as Americans who are aged 18 and older, living in 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, there is less clarity as to what drove the debate past legal and media channels to the Supreme Court where nine be-robed intelligentsias felt duty-bound to redefine a nine thousand year old institution that was specifically designed to protect human reproduction – all in an effort to scratch a seven year itch.
With a particularly militant entertainment industry's diligent mainstreaming of the homosexual lifestyle since the 1970s and comparatively little social change to show for it, the Left had to rely on five-of-nine…any Borg allusions are entirely coincidental by the way…Justices to misappropriate constitutional protections in order to seal the deal.
There is paradoxically even less to the Left's directive on "gay marriage" than the Supreme Court ruling because, upon further review, the cause of "gay marriage" is subordinate to the true objective.
Candidly speaking, gay men and women will eventually understand how they were pawns in this rope-a-dope. Just as people of color are seduced and destroyed by the language of social justice, just as women are debased and mutilated for the shortsighted gain of reproductive freedom, the Gay lobby has been targeted for destruction by the Left too. It's unavoidable. Socialism consumes and gay men and women will begin feeling the ravages of their deal with the devil soon enough.
Marriage – so again we find the American Left fashioning a millennials old institution for better optics – as if the 30 second sound bite was infinitely more important than preserving the nuclear family, which is the cornerstone of a healthy society and essential for the transference of tradition, knowledge and culture.
This leaves informed, conservative voters with an uncomfortable realization that this was more about establishing ascendency than it was about the legitimacy of the so-called gay marriage debate.
Instituting channels of communication and finance, controlling the narrative and effectively mobilizing their troops for social change; these were the overriding objectives and expanding marriage definitions was simply a convenient ruse. We've all learned a lot from this exercise. We know now that if the Left decides to flex its muscles and work toward the need for universal tattooing, you can bet within half a decade there will be five-of-nine Justices voting that the State's right to brand children can be found in the Fourteenth Amendment.
Per Barack Obama, seeing a rainbow-suffused White House was a moment worth savoring. No doubt. I'm sure that when the Bolsheviks had completed the task of painting Nero's cross on the doors of Russian churches to communicate the ascendency of communism, they stood back and savored their moment too. Most interestingly, that act of vanity is the lone evidence of the Left's fatal flaw. They know full well that to effectively implement the revolutionary changes they seek, they are tasked with rendering institutions completely unrecognizable from the inside while leaving the exteriors untouched, but their egos usually get the best of them.
The rainbow White House is precisely the kind of evidence that resolute Leftists eschew. They gave their opposition an image to rally against. It has now been documented to the annals of history that a two hundred year old symbol of neoclassical endurance, which has stood resolutely against tyranny and has survived an arson attempt, a terrorist plot and blue dresses, has been compromised to reflect pop culture's lust for form-over-substance parody. Remarkably, the Left's proud papier-mâché is announced through the distorted symbol of a sacred covenant now projected upon the beloved monument of American fidelity to God and country. With that image burned indelibly into our brains, we might consider this an opportunity to revisit previous deliberations of pastel patriotism and its assault on American heritage.