For two years I have been told by my friends on the left that the world is gray. If I had a dollar for every time one of these intellectual giants from the Democratic Party looked down upon me from their station in life and bequeathed upon me these words of wisdom, I could retire. The War on Terror isn't as simple as good and evil, politics not as clear as conservative or liberal. We need a more “nuanced” approach.

Don't misunderstand, things were never simple, it is just a strategy the left utilizes to characterize our positions in such a way as to marginalize them. What better tactic than to argue that support for the war and a conservative agenda is oversimplified and narrow-minded? It discards our belief system out of hand and saves Democrats the trouble of having to defend their own.

Now though, in the wake of the election, we are getting a most-instructive lesson in how they actually view this country, and there is nothing gray about it.

A recent letter to the editor proclaimed that Evangelical Christians had abandoned their faith by voting for George W. Bush. It further stated that the faithful had turned their backs on “true” moral values by refusing to acknowledge the importance of poverty, education, and the lack of health insurance; in exchange for false (I guess) moral issues like gay marriage and abortion. I ask you, could there be a more “black and white” attitude than that? We are also privy to proclamations, both before and after the election, like “middle America is stupid,” “Bush is evil,” and “Iraq is a quagmire.” Gray indeed.

Of course, the easiest thing to do, now that our leftist brethren have proudly proclaimed the world black and white, would be to turn to them and accuse them of speaking with a forked tongue. Or, with delicious irony and crinkled brow say “The world isn't that simple. You should expand your horizons.” But, let us choose a different tact.

Instead I welcome the 2004 election as the pivotal event that finally opened the left's eyes to the black and white nature of the world. (Since a shade must be attached to either argument, I choose black for our own lest I be accused of racism.) That they see the world in black and white terms comes as no surprise to us, but may be a revelation of staggering proportions to them. So, if you are a liberal Democrat, just take a moment and let it sink in. Don't try to absorb too much at once. Feel better? O.k...continue.

Seeing the world in black and white does not automatically assume a simplicity of argument. But it does force one to choose sides. Unfortunately for my liberal friends, they chose the wrong side. It became more and more apparent to fellow conservatives over the course of the election cycle that this was the case, and it was certainly not lost on the independent voter on Nov.2.

In many ways it is a rather ironic situation. For years we have been told by liberals that we must begin to think more radically about our future. In fact, radicalism became a sort of rallying cry of the left. For all I know, they invented the term “outside the box.” Over the last four years, however, it has been the Republican Party with radical ideas, and Democrats cast as the champion of the status quo. This was apparent with literally every single issue on the campaign trail.

On education, the Republican Party platform champions “vouchers” that allow parents to select the school of their choice with their tax dollars. Republicans call for increased accountability for schools and teachers in order to insure that they are doing the job that taxpayers expect of them.

Democrats defend the status quo of “more spending,” which is the same tired argument they have been making for twenty years.

On social security, Republicans have radical ideas about reforms that will allow participants to invest a portion of their account privately and create a trust fund that government can never touch. Expensive? You bet. Perhaps as much as a trillion dollars. But weighed against doing nothing and allowing social security to collapse or simply subsidizing the program in perpetuity, it is actually pretty frugal. Democrats again defended the status quo of “protecting” social security, which is akin to protecting a drug addict from rehab.

Then, or course, there is the War on Terror. Never has there been an issue where the contrast is more pronounced. Republicans believe that a free people are less inclined to lash out at other cultures due to a dissatisfaction with their own. They believe that they are duty bound not to negotiate with terrorists like Yassir Arafat. They believe that the world is at a crossroads with Islamic fundamentalism and can't, in good conscience, sit back and allow their hate to seep into our cultures. For more on this see:

Democrats prefer to take the Old Europe approach to terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism, defined as: If you don't talk about it it isn't there. And, whatever you do, don't piss them off. That particular “speak no evil” approach to dealing with Islamic Fascism is precisely why we find ourselves in this ugly situation today. And while the Republicans proactive approach to this very serious problem has kept the country relatively safe since 9/11, Europe's refusal to embrace a proactive stance has many countries in turmoil as we speak. The Netherlands, Spain, France, and Russia are all facing a nightmare situation of their own making.

This is highlighted in the Netherlands where citizens are waking up to the realization that tolerance of other cultures is not something that Islamic fascists respect. The brutal murder of Theo Van Gogh, death threats to the countries leaders, riots and general mayhem are becoming the order of the day. If there is any good news in the fact that European countries find themselves increasingly under the thumb of Islamic fundamentalism, it is that they must now address the problem or face the prospect of handing over the keys to their country to the barbarians. There are already signs that Europe is waking up, most notably in Russia, where Vladimir Putin has been increasingly quieter in his criticism of the Bush administration.

So the world is black and white after all. In this trying age where democracy must make a stand, both domestically and abroad, the choices become simpler every day. It is not a matter of right and wrong, or liberal vs. conservative. It is a choice between the inertia of the past and a radical new vision for the future. In a post 9/11 world, the voters prefer vision.

I guess we should thank the Democratic Party for that. They have been preaching radicalism for two decades. Is it our fault that we listened?

Post election I have spent a great deal of time trolling the loony-lefty sites. Call it optimism, but I thought that perhaps my special brand of wisdom might attract a few converts. Even more outrageous, maybe I would learn something. Well...I did. What I learned is that the loony-left is not interested in opinions or facts that clash with their worldview.

A perfect example of this mentality can be found at http://nyc.indymedia.org/. This is an outrageous site that is primarily frequented by the most vile leftists on the planet. Oh how I have tried to talk some sense into that crowd, but I repeatedly found that my comments were being deleted from a given discussion. One polite member, after calling me a chump, informed that my posts were probably being "rated" off the site. Essentially, angry members were dumping my comments because they didn't like them. It explains a lot.

It explains how the site faithful can have such a jaded view of the world. Ganging up on divergent posts is the information age version of holding your hands over your ears and yelling lalalalalalala until whatever you find offensive goes away.

I don't generally consider myself a naive individual, but I was under the impression that the "left" in this country based it's general philosophy on an openness to new ideas, a respect for the worldview of others, and the free discussion of ideas. So...maybe I am naive, but one thing is for sure. After spending a week on the site trying to squeeze the tiniest bit of sense into the loonies, I found myself instead stooping to their tactics. Try it for a couple of days and see if it doesn't happen to you.

Before I knew it I was referring to people as "mutts" and screaming at the top of my lungs just like the rest of them. That was when I knew that my noble idea of sharing the wealth was simply the "pie in the sky" of another stupid American. 

Hey, at least I tried.