The right wing seems to think that the Spaniards are now sniveling cowards, too terrified of the big bad al-Queda to ever stand up against them, and that the vote is a terrible blow against democracy.

What a load of crap, spewed by the whiniest bunch of losers I have had the displeasure to read.

First, as I have already pointed out, the Spanish have been dealing with terrorism for decades. After this attack, million marched in protest of terrorism, knowing that such a large protest would be a prime target. Compare that to the way Washington D.C. shut down during the sniper assault. I am not blaming the residents of D.C. — I am just pointing out that the Spanish do not seem to lack for courage.

Second, the idea that al-Queda wanted the Socialist to win is obvious only to people who refuse to look at the world with notions that haven’t come from the RNC fax machine. Considering that al-Queda recruitment has gone up since the invasion of Iraq, and considering that the Bush Administration’s neglect of Afghanistan have allowed the Taliban to rebuild and become a threat again, the case for al-Queda wanting Bush allies in power is actually pretty strong. All of which is besides the point. Does it really matter what the terrorists think? How many Bush supporters would switch sides if Bin Laden announced that he would prefer that Bush continue in power? In a democracy, we make the decisions we think best, regardless of the delusions of our enemies. A vote for a different strategy is not a vote for terrorists. It may be incorrect, but to call it cowardly is a disgusting perversion of the intentions of the voters.

Here is what happened in Spain. The largest attack in European history occurred a couple of days before an election. The Spanish government rushed to blame ETA, because that would have been politically helpful for them. It turns out that ETA probably did not conduct the attack. The Spanish held a large protest against terrorism, and then voted. At a 76% participation rate, 8 points higher than the last election. The party in power went form a small win to a small loss. That is an affirmation of democracy. al-Queda did not prevent the elections from taking place, and they did not prevent the people of Spain form going to the polls in very large numbers. So what if the handling of the tragedy by the government in power made them look bad? So what if some people were driven off the fence by the realization that the strategy the conservatives backed wasn’t a good one? If the Spanish people — a people who have lived with the violent conflict with ETA for decades — were convinced Bush was following the correct strategy, the attack would not have made a difference. If al-Queda was able to sway a few minds — a big if –, it is only because Bush and the conservatives in Spain failed to convince Spaniards that they were on the winning path. They have no one to blame for that but themselves.

Democracy is not defined as “a process that produces results that the right wing agrees with.” The Spanish went to the polls in huge numbers under extraordinary circumstances and voted for what they thought was best. it is a triumph of democracy over its enemies, but because the “wrong” party won, the right wing now condemns the majority of Span to dupes and cowards. They are no such thing. They should great heart and great courage, and it is vile insult to them and the memory of their dead to insist that a rejection of the right wing’s plans is an acquiescence to terror. The fact that so many prominent right wingers would do so shows the intellectual and moral decay at the heart of their positions on the war on terror.

Democracy won in Spain, and no amount of sniveling, whining, or character assassination can change that.