[NYCFarmboy]

What do people on here think is the reason why there is so much hatred by those on the left for their perceived enemies, in particular President Bush.

I don't hate anyone, I've posted in here thousands of times, I'm actually in real life more liberal on some things, more conservative on others, I have friends who are far left wing, and friends that are far right wing.

The difference over the last few years is that in my own circle of real life friends, and on this forum of which I'm a occasional participant I've noticed a STRONG shift to extreme hatred towards the American President.... for no rational reason.

It is not just the left in the USA, but the left through out the world that has just completely lost their minds in a vision of personal hatred towards the president that frankly is just not sane.

Possibilities on why this has happened:

1. the left never got over losing 2000 because in fact Gore did get more popular votes than Bush.

-- that is our system works. it is not perfect but it is a compromise of the constitution built in to protect the interest of smaller less populated states over the tyranny of the majority states.


2. this seed of hatred against Bush was burned into the minds of those who supported Gore, without regard for what is best overall for the country.

--9/11/Iraq/Afghanistan -- the seeds of hate burned more and more into the lefts minds as they saw Bush moving from what some considered a accidental / illigitamate presidency into one of the most important presidential terms in our history.

3. the election of 2004. Bush won easily, yet the left because of their hatred, continued to cling to bizarre fanticies of voter fraud in Ohio in any attempt to reverse the election, although this time Bush did easily win the popular vote as well.

-- this part, point 3 I think has brought me to the conclusion of those on the left and their intolerance: when it serves their purpose they purport to be for the will of the people, but in any attempt to sieze power anything including the popular vote can be swept under the rug in this instance....quite a eye opening event in my opinion on the true motives of the hard left.

4. Hurricane Katrina: The left was again screaching hatred and blaming Bush for this even before the storm was OVER! Now that the facts have came out of incomptance by Democratic politicians in Louisiana blocking Red Cross Aid from coming IN for the victoms in the superdome, the Mayor blocking people from leaving the superdome...the hundreds of buses that sat by empty which could have evacuated thousands.. all of this and the lunatic left could only screach Hate Bush.

--- people are dying, yet the left could only do one thing in their own warped minds: hate Bush.

my thoughts:
the lunatic left needs to grow up and quit behaving like spoiled children.

People: and this includes those all over the world... we are all in the same boat together,
this extreme bizarre & personal hatred the wierd left has for Bush is not getting you anywhere.
If you think it is, you are sadly mistaken.

Back during the Clinton years those on the right strongly disliked Clinton, but they never let that get in the way of continuing to work for what is best for everyone in the United States, and for everyone of the world.

We've had a natural disaster, we've had 9/11, and we have survived, and we will continue to survive, but the one thing that really dissapoints me is how SOME on the left has handled themselves.

You can get up in the morning every day and scheme of new ways to hate someone, or you can get up and work for the betterment of yourself, for your neighbors, for your country, and for the world.

You will not accomplish anything for anyone if all you can do is hate.

George Bush is a good guy, there is a reason he was elected.. for those of you who can't see this, I guess you will continue to practice your politics of hate... but I know that some will read this and perhaps note that some of us in the middle are quite sick of how the fringe left has behaved over the last few years.

We have rebuilding to do, we can do that best if we do it together.

[dcmacdaddy]

While I am on the political left in terms of my beliefs regarding social issues I am NOT a member of "The Left". In elections I vote for Republicans about one-third of the time, maybe more. It all depends on the candidate. Having said that, here is some reasons why I don't like Bush.

**Massive defense spending with corresponding cuts in social spending.
**No thought whatsoever to reduce our country's dependence on oil overall, not just foreign oil.
**Introduction of religious practice/belief/ideology into a secular government.
**His belief that the private sector can do almost everything better than the public sector.
**His stance on homosexuality and same-sex marriage.
**The invasion of Iraq.
**HIs belief that "American" democracy is the best form of democracy, perhaps even the best form of government, in the world.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy

What do people on here think is the reason why there is so much hatred by those on the left for their perceived enemies, in particular President Bush.

I don't hate anyone, I've posted in here thousands of times, I'm actually in real life more liberal on some things, more conservative on others, I have friends who are far left wing, and friends that are far right wing.

The difference over the last few years is that in my own circle of real life friends, and on this forum of which I'm a occasional participant I've noticed a STRONG shift to extreme hatred towards the American President.... for no rational reason.

I could write a huge thesis on this (and perhaps will when I have the time and inclination), but I'll summarise:

"The Left" are a bunch of easily-led lemmings with (generally) a very flaky perception of reality.

[Y3a]

Those who do not follow the details of the news fall for the inaccurate headlines, and believe that the news is factual, when in fact it is left biased.

The Hollywood left has it's pop culture icons stating leftist viewpoints as if it were facts, and so without any basis you get hatred from the mis-informed. There is also a follower mentality with the left too.

The appearance of Bush has been used to try and judge him, but that evaluatiuon wouldn't work on Stephen Hawking would it.

Most folks don't keep up with the news stories after a 1-2 days anyway, and miss the real outcome, instead they assume the writers opinions are facts.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by Doofy

I could write a huge thesis on this (and perhaps will when I have the time and inclination), but I'll summarise:

"The Left" are a bunch of easily-led lemmings with (generally) a very flaky perception of reality.

The most idiotic argument is the one that would play exactly the same if you simply change the subject. Swap 'Right' for 'Left' and the other half of us would agree.

This summarizes your Thesis? A vague subjective statement that every group makes about its opponents... Making a fcuking point Doofus.
'

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Doofy

I could write a huge thesis on this (and perhaps will when I have the time and inclination), but I'll summarise:

"The Left" are a bunch of easily-led lemmings with (generally) a very flaky perception of reality.

"The Right" are a bunch of easily-led lemmings with (generally) a very flaky perception of reality. Fixed.

Making generalizations like this does nothing but inflame, especially when they are not grounded in fact. People have their own opinions on any number of subjects, and those who are different than us deserve to have their views aired, without resorting to ridiculous generalizations.

As to the question at hand; I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't "hate" Bush. I think he's trying to lead America on a path where war solves issues (it doesn't), and he's not very inclusive or open minded, with his supposed religious beliefs actually leaving out a number of American citizens who deserve to have their place alongside the rest of us. That, however, comes as part of the package when you're not secure in your own beliefs to accept others with different views, and we have to live with that for now.

[OreoCookie]

The rift is not between the `Left' and Bush, it's between the people and Bush. Criticism increases from both sides of the aisle about a whole range of topics: criticism of Bolton's appointment, Robert's nomination, disaster management in LA, ... There are numerous valid reasons to criticize his politics, although you claim there is `no rational reason' for that.

[QuadG5Man]

Farmboy, here's my two cents: the 'left' is very emotionally critical right now of Bush etc. because they are serving their own political purposes. Like, "duh" this is POLITICS after all, and politcs, like Hollywood, is a popularity contest. Turning the President into the 'Devil' serves an AGENDA, can you say, Hillary Clinton?

What bothers me though, is that the 'Bush-is-the-devil' politics seen so emotionally represented in the media and "Hollyweird" (thanks Cody), often echo the same sentiments of the terrorists who want to kill us. The far left may only wake up to reality after another terrorist strike happens in say....L.A. that makes 9/11 or Katrina look like a blip on the map. This is a real shame people, and makes the word 'Patriot' seem distantly antiquated.

As a 26 year old college grad, I am amazed at the strong left wing bias I see among my contemporaries ages 22-28 who seem to know everthing about the world. I've stopped discussing politics with some folks because of this.
http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lounge/258744/wtc-selling-for-scrap-hides-evidence/

And if you're reading this thread, check out:
http://www.victorhanson.com/

Cheers.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

The demonizing of Bush by the left is nothing new- they demonized Reagan just as eagerly. I think it chafes their asses to now realize that despite all the bile they dredged up against Reagan, little of if it stuck and he’s looked on rather favorably. History records him as he truly was- his faults and his accomplishments, but none of it as the left tried to spin it.

I think the 2000 elections kicked off the irrational Bush hatred. I think that many have hated that he squeaked by Gore on a technicality, and they’ve been gunning for him ever since.

Many on the left don’t seem to understand the ‘cry wolf’ principal. They’re so eager to jump on Bush for every little thing- never picking their battles (trying to blame him for Katrina was the latest classic example) that people who are not mired in political agendas quickly grow weary and dismiss the bulk of their histrionics out of hand.

It barely seems to register with the left that after 4 solid years of crying wolf, Americans not only didn’t hate Bush ‘just because the haters say so’, they made it even more crystal clear that they’d take Bush over a wishy-washy Democrat any day of the week. Not only didn’t it register, the left somehow waxes right past this and thinks that incidents like the Katrina ‘bile and blame-fest’ will help them in 2008.

What do you call it again when you think doing the same old thing over and over, expecting a different result each time?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

The demonizing of Bush by the left is nothing new- they demonized Reagan just as eagerly. I think it chafes their asses to now realize that despite all the bile they dredged up against Reagan, little of if it stuck and he’s looked on rather favorably. History records him as he truly was- his faults and his accomplishments, but none of it as the left tried to spin it.

I think the 2000 elections kicked off the irrational Bush hatred. I think that many have hated that he squeaked by Gore on a technicality, and they’ve been gunning for him ever since.

Many on the left don’t seem to understand the ‘cry wolf’ principal. They’re so eager to jump on Bush for every little thing- never picking their battles (trying to blame him for Katrina was the latest classic example) that people who are not mired in political agendas quickly grow weary and dismiss the bulk of their histrionics out of hand.

It barely seems to register with the left that after 4 solid years of crying wolf, Americans not only didn’t hate Bush ‘just because the haters say so’, they made it even more crystal clear that they’d take Bush over a wishy-washy Democrat any day of the week. Not only didn’t it register, the left somehow waxes right past this and thinks that incidents like the Katrina ‘bile and blame-fest’ will help them in 2008.

What do you call it again when you think doing the same old thing over and over, expecting a different result each time?

I think this is true, but I think also that there are some additonal factors. One is the general erosion of the influence of the left which makes them frustrated and angry. They aren't just out of the White House, but they also lost control of Congress. Control of the House of Representatives was something that liberals (and more broadly the left) took for granted ever since the 1930s. Now it is gone, and it didn't turn out to be just because of the fleeting "tantrum of angry white males" that they supposed back in 1994. A similar erosion has taken place at the state level. What makes them really mad is that they know it isn't because of sinister plots but just because the country disagrees with them. That's why they turn to European opinion to try to win allies. They can't get it at home. It's especially why they want international law (read: the received wisdom of elite western Europeans and academics) to trump US democracy. If you can't win over your countrymen, overrride them.

Second, there is the erosion of media control. It used to be the case that liberals could set the agenda of public discourse. They still do to some extent, but there are many more sources of news now so that many of their media arguments get rebutted and frequently debunked. It's got to be very frustrating.

Third, there are increasing challenges in other areas where the left has traditionally dominated. Liberal academics predominate, but there is at least discussion of the fact. It has put them at least somewhat on the defensive. This is basically for two reasons. One is increased discussion brought about by the opening of the media. The other is the fact that the left simply went too far with their speech codes, race quotas, and Marxist indoctrination. They got too out of touch with the rest of the country -- including their own students.

Fourth, the political shift means that they are in danger of losing their control of the federal judiciary. This is also assisted by the increased intellectual vibrancy of the challenge from conservative think tanks and academics. The interesing ideas that are attracting attention don't come from the left.

Fifth: Socialism is discredited. Not only did Communism fall, but also the more moderate forms of socialism practiced in other western democracies have proved to be failures. When countries like Margaret Thatcher's Britain showed that the only way to revive a country was to turn to the private markets, it took the wind out of the left. They have never recovered.

Sixth: The Democratic Party has shifted to the left as moderate Democrats have gone over to the Republican Party. Mainly, this is because of defense policy, but there are other causes. The polarization over the judiciary has helped make a litmus test of abortion so that many moderate Democrats find they have no home in their old party. The primary system encourages the parties to polarize. The same new media that has helped diversify discussion has also helped the far left mobilize, which has helped the far left push out the moderate left.

I'm sure there is more than this, but those are some thoughts. Another unrelated thought is that I would disagree that some elements of the right weren't equally loopy when Clinton was president. They did impeach him over virtually nothing, after all. But they didn't control the media and academia the way the left does, and so their voice was muted by the much larger number of sane people.

And that brings me to another thing that really saddens me. That's the tendency of even quite intelligent people to dismiss anyone who disagrees with them politically. I have literally lost friends (or people I thought were friends) because they couldn't cope with the idea I might vote for a different party from them. That's really losing your grip on reality.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

...Having said that, here is some reasons why I don't like Bush.

**His belief that the private sector can do almost everything better than the public sector.

I have to agree with Mr. Bush in this. Public servants become so mired in buracracy that their efficiency drops to near zero, and their motivation is to get through their shift, not to help people. On the other hand, I have always believed that the Federal Government should act as a arbiter of disputes and most of all it should set and enforce rules. Without federal interference, the meat packing industry might still be working immigrants to death-and packing their accidentally severed fingers along with the beef-as they did before the Pure Food and Drug Act. I think a better alternative than "all or nothing" would be for the private sector to come up with ways to help people according to well defined and strenuously enforced federal rules.

The only things that I think should be exclusively governmental are those that are broadly applicable to the whole country; trade, defense, environment, etc. The social problems in rural South Carolina are vastly different from those in Charleston, just as they are vastly different from the problems in rural South Dakota. That's something local people should have a serious hand in, and a lot of control over.

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

**HIs belief that "American" democracy is the best form of democracy, perhaps even the best form of government, in the world.

So far he's right. That's not to say that the way we implement things here today is really "American" democracy anymore. We've managed to goober up our very nicely crafted, very flexible and robust system so that lately it seems to be ALL about the money. Jefferson never said a darn thing about "the guy who buys the best advertising should be the winner."

With all of that said, I need to stress that there are really a number of groups with a variety of fairly well shared ideas about the president. I have problems with most of them, as their ideas fall into the category of "beliefs," and as such are not easily influenced by facts. ANY fanatic is dangerous, whether he or she is a firebreathing, yellow dog Democrat, or an ultraconservative, "better dead than Red" Republican-or a bomb-toting religious fanatic.

The people the OP described as "the left" are just as fanatic as the people who flew planes into buildings four years ago today. Shame on them. They are just being pupets of the press that they listen to and party bosses. The same is true for "the right," who hold everything the RNC says to be Gospel. Just yacking and voting the straight party ticket is NOT being an involved citizen-it's just the particular brand of sheep you happen to be.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

The demonizing of Bush by the left is nothing new- they demonized Reagan just as eagerly.

Yes, but not as many folks listened. I think the shift in demographics toward the "me" culture with older people (the boomers) and the "why me" culture of younger types (fed by a weak and biased educational system) has opened up political opportunities that The Left couldn't resist exploiting.

I can remember clearly when The Left lost the hearts and minds of the last of the Depression-era types, and it was before Reagan. Just before. He came along at the right time. The cry was "what happened to the Democratic party?" and folks abandoned it in droves.

Why the animosity? They know that it works. Usually. Didn't work in the last couple of national elections, but class envy and naked fear-mongering will have their day again.

Plus, the radical socialistas have always been there, ready to smear and propagandize, but we just hear more about them now. The profitable promise of sensationalism guarantees that we see more of the Cindy Sheehans and less of the ordinary folks who get it and make sense.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Great post Simey.

I agree, there were people that were just as crazy when it came to demonizing Clinton, but it never was on the scale and level as the Bush hatred has devolved to. Sadest, those that actually have a legitimate gripe against Bush (I for one despise his immigration policies) don't even seem to realize that their voices get lost in the noise from the conspiracy kooks claiming things like he masterminded 9/11 and Katrina.

I'd disagree with only one thing you said- that's about the Clinton impeachment. It's only been boiled down to popular folklore that this was 'about virtually nothing'. It came up while Clinton was being investigated for very serious charges brought against him by people he had used his authority over to abuse and sexually assault. The very thing over which the left dragged us through the whole Hill/Thomas fiasco and resulting politically correctness gone haywire ever since- pretending they were out to irradiate such behavior.

The folklore since has boiled all this down to just a matter of one sex act, and therefore, "Oh, it's no big deal." I submit a person grossly abusing their authority to assault workers IS a big deal, and lying under oath is also. Impeachment and temporary loss of a legal license were slaps on the wrists, really. Those were the real issues, not the excuse folklore that's come down the pike since.

[Pendergast]

Question:

Is there an economic cycle making the alternance of the left to the right then vice-versa?

Like, once the right has a good control over the economy, the left takes over?

Or is it related to the emergence of an external threat, like the USSR, then the Korean War, then Viet-Nam, etc.?

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

And that brings me to another thing that really saddens me. That's the tendency of even quite intelligent people to dismiss anyone who disagrees with them politically. I have literally lost friends (or people I thought were friends) because they couldn't cope with the idea I might vote for a different party from them. That's really losing your grip on reality.

I feel exactly the same... it has really saddened me..I've lost several 'friends' who likewise had no tolerance for divergent viewpoints.

After the last election I expected my lib friends to of course be upset, ...but I expected over time that they would let rationality return.. but it has not, they have just went further overboard to the point that quite honestly I think they would probably be better off being institutionalized and getting professioanl counsiling. I know people who seriously believe that Bush is 'evil'... when you calmly talk about this and ask them to explain it they can't and end up becoming even more irrational.

I posted this thread as I think I understand why this has happened but I'm wondering what can be done to return people to their senses.. is it just going to have to be another election with someone other than Bush? As you posted, there was just as much irrational hatred of Reagan, and now he is remembered as one of the great presidents of our republic, and for ending communism & human misery thru out much of the former Eastern Bloc.

Which brings out even more denial by those on the left, that they can't get over the fact that socialism (shared misery) does not work.

I guess in the end you can't worry about those whose ideals have passed them by, leaving them to be shadows of themselves barking into the night tales of woe everytime something bad happens hoping maybe this time someone will listen to them.

I think these people are doomed to a sad life, I wish there was something that could be done for them though, to make them realize that really life is a wonderful thing, that every day is a new day, a chance for creating something new, to build on something, rather than just screaching hate.

It hurts me to see these people do this to themselves. Life has so much to experience, it is so much more than just being the embodiment of hate.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy

What do people on here think is the reason why there is so much hatred by those on the left for their perceived enemies, in particular President Bush.

While I doubt the sincerity of this question, let me give you an alternative view of things: The unique fact of the American political situation right now is not so much 'Bush hatred' as 'Bush worship.' Independents/moderates are quite close to Democrats/liberals in their views of Bush, and Repubs/conservatives are essentially alone in their very strong support for Bush, no matter what happens.

In my view, in an un-polarized political climate, this guy's policies would be soundly rejected. Instead, his supporters are powerful and dedicated enough that they skew the debate towards irrational and destructive policies that would otherwise be rejected. The most obvious example is that Bush brought our country into war on false pretenses. The fact that this doesn't bother his supporters says more about them than about any 'hatred' by his opponents.

Many of the other big issues that this administration has tackled show a similar pattern: The country's fiscal situation has been taken from sound to 'bad and getting worse' by this president's policies of tax cuts + spending increases. That wasn't caused by Democratic 'hatred,' but by Republicans abandoning their traditional fiscal concerns and instead doing whatever Bush wants, no matter how wrong. Likewise, independent analysts and independent-minded Republicans agree that the response to hurricane Katrina was terrible, and yet Bush's supporters defend it.

So my question would be: Why do Bush supporters love him so much, in the face of objective evidence of his failure? Is it just polarization? Is it that Republicans are concerned with loyalty above all, which is one of the criticisms of the Bush administration? Or is it what I've heard many liberals claim, that the type of religious influence in contemporary Republicanism is so strong that it skews the views of their political leaders?

Whatever the reason, my view is that it's the strong support of Bush by Republicans that needs to be explained, not the rejection of his policies by liberals and independents.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

"The Left" are a bunch of easily-led lemmings with (generally) a very flaky perception of reality.

Originally Posted by KarlG

Making generalizations like this does nothing but inflame, especially when they are not grounded in fact. People have their own opinions on any number of subjects, and those who are different than us deserve to have their views aired, without resorting to ridiculous generalizations.

Which is why I used the word "generally" in brackets.

Your reply is self-negating. You state that those who are different to you (that's me) deserve to have their views aired (that's: '"The Left" are a bunch of easily-led lemmings with (generally) a very flaky perception of reality.') yet when they're aired you call them "ridiculous generalizations".

Originally Posted by KarlG

As to the question at hand; I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't "hate" Bush. I think he's trying to lead America on a path where war solves issues (it doesn't), and he's not very inclusive or open minded, with his supposed religious beliefs actually leaving out a number of American citizens who deserve to have their place alongside the rest of us. That, however, comes as part of the package when you're not secure in your own beliefs to accept others with different views, and we have to live with that for now.

Now, where did you get those opinions which I've highlighted? Did you get them from reality (i.e. actually talking to the Prez) or did you get them third-hand from someone who's trying to influence you?
Is it a reality that Bush is insecure in his own beliefs or just some rumour you heard from a fellow lemming? Are you grounded in reality when you make this statement? Do you know what's actually going on in Bush's head?
You state that he's not "open minded"... ...is that a fact based in reality or some perception you have of him because he's made a few decisions which you disagree with? I mean, you know that he didn't consider all the options before he came to a decision, right?


Your reply proved my summary to be valid.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by BRussell

While I doubt the sincerity of this question, let me give you an alternative view of things: The unique fact of the American political situation right now is not so much 'Bush hatred' as 'Bush worship.' Independents/moderates are quite close to Democrats/liberals in their views of Bush, and Repubs/conservatives are essentially alone in their very strong support for Bush, no matter what happens.

In my view, in an un-polarized political climate, this guy's policies would be soundly rejected. Instead, his supporters are powerful and dedicated enough that they skew the debate towards irrational and destructive policies that would otherwise be rejected. The most obvious example is that Bush brought our country into war on false pretenses. The fact that this doesn't bother his supporters says more about them than about any 'hatred' by his opponents.

Many of the other big issues that this administration has tackled show a similar pattern: The country's fiscal situation has been taken from sound to 'bad and getting worse' by this president's policies of tax cuts + spending increases. That wasn't caused by Democratic 'hatred,' but by Republicans abandoning their traditional fiscal concerns and instead doing whatever Bush wants, no matter how wrong. Likewise, independent analysts and independent-minded Republicans agree that the response to hurricane Katrina was terrible, and yet Bush's supporters defend it.

So my question would be: Why do Bush supporters love him so much, in the face of objective evidence of his failure? Is it just polarization? Is it that Republicans are concerned with loyalty above all, which is one of the criticisms of the Bush administration? Or is it what I've heard many liberals claim, that the type of religious influence in contemporary Republicanism is so strong that it skews the views of their political leaders?

Whatever the reason, my view is that it's the strong support of Bush by Republicans that needs to be explained, not the rejection of his policies by liberals and independents.

I want to thank you. This post has made me realize why I'm such an idiot to debate politics on this or any forum. It's obvious that people like you don't get it and more importantly you don't want to get it. This "objective evidence" you speak of is only evidence in your opinion. Does it even occur to you that we may not agree with your assessment of Bush's performance for GENUINE well thought-out reasons? You don't seem to have a grasp of this issues if you really believe that people like me defend Bush out of petty loyalty or some such BS. Religious influence? You have been reading too many leftist opinions if you think that has anything to do with anything.

[Chuckit]

I think they didn't like him to begin with and he really hasn't done anything to change their minds at all, so they just keep liking him less and less.

By the way, smacintush, you failed to answer any of BRussell's questions. If you aren't going to make an attempt to talk to him, why should anybody on the left give you the time of day?

[Pendergast]

Why is the Right apologizing for Bush's failures?

[NYCFarmboy]

the comments on the left are of course what I expected, I know we can't expect someone who drank the kool-aid™ of hate to suddently admit to the error of their ways.

The sincere reason I posted this, and it is sincere... it is saddening to see people behave this way.

I never expected people who voted for Gore or Kerry to be pleased as punch with Bush, but the vitriolic, seething & putrid hatred is something I think in my own opinion has reached a point of not only just disgust, but actual pity by those of us in the middle.

I wouldn't be posting this if I were right wing, as truely the left is digging their own political grave by behaving in the manner of hatred and fear-mongering that they do for what they think would be political gain... when in fact it is only damaging their own future for credibility and electability by the American electorate.

Let me repeat that point to make it obvious: If all I cared about was the continued electoral victories of the Republican Party I wouldn't be raising this issue.... I'd keep shut so that the left could continue to dig their own political grave.

But I care, I think in America as well as in the entire world people owe it to each other to be civil, to indeed be friendly and helpful even if you disagree politically.

It MAKES ME SO @#%@#$^%$#^#@$#%#$ UPSET that people on the left are so close minded on this and can't see what @sses they are making of themselves.

Some of you will remember I voted for Ralph Nader, I think the more choices we have the bettter off we are.

I know how much people on the left HATED me for supporting Nader as they thought it was taking a vote away from who THEY wanted to win. But that was not the issue... I was making a statement with my vote for something I believed in for MYSELF....NOT for the interest of any PARTY.

I still have lots of freinds who drink the koolaid on the left and so I'm not giving up hope, many do not mind that I have a different political viewpoint.

But again, as to my original post, I think the time has come for people to stop being so close minded and hateful and to start working towards at least being civil with each other.

We have to work to forgive and help those who continue to be so hateful. I know that sounds mushy/wishy/washy on my part, but we are not going to rebuild a better country together if this division continues.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy

the comments on the left are of course what I expected, I know we can't expect someone who drank the kool-aid™ of hate to suddently admit to the error of their ways.

The sincere reason I posted this, and it is sincere... it is saddening to see people behave this way.

I never expected people who voted for Gore or Kerry to be pleased as punch with Bush, but the vitriolic, seething & putrid hatred is something I think in my own opinion has reached a point of not only just disgust, but actual pity by those of us in the middle.

I wouldn't be posting this if I were right wing, as truely the left is digging their own political grave by behaving in the manner of hatred and fear-mongering that they do for what they think would be political gain... when in fact it is only damaging their own future for credibility and electability by the American electorate.

Let me repeat that point to make it obvious: If all I cared about was the continued electoral victories of the Republican Party I wouldn't be raising this issue.... I'd keep shut so that the left could continue to dig their own political grave.

But I care, I think in America as well as in the entire world people owe it to each other to be civil, to indeed be friendly and helpful even if you disagree politically.

It MAKES ME SO @#%@#$^%$#^#@$#%#$ UPSET that people on the left are so close minded on this and can't see what @sses they are making of themselves.

Some of you will remember I voted for Ralph Nader, I think the more choices we have the bettter off we are.

I know how much people on the left HATED me for supporting Nader as they thought it was taking a vote away from who THEY wanted to win. But that was not the issue... I was making a statement with my vote for something I believed in for MYSELF....NOT for the interest of any PARTY.

I still have lots of freinds who drink the koolaid on the left and so I'm not giving up hope, many do not mind that I have a different political viewpoint.

But again, as to my original post, I think the time has come for people to stop being so close minded and hateful and to start working towards at least being civil with each other.

We have to work to forgive and help those who continue to be so hateful. I know that sounds mushy/wishy/washy on my part, but we are not going to rebuild a better country together if this division continues.

Friendly advice:

1) Stop vilipending "the left", because it is not always "the left" vs "the right".
2) It's all politics, and the season is on all year long, whoever is sitting in that chair.
3) It's a "winner takes all" game, and that is what has happened when Bush got in. His replacement will do the same, whoever he is affiliated with.

Period.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

By the way, smacintush, you failed to answer any of BRussell's questions. If you aren't going to make an attempt to talk to him, why should anybody on the left give you the time of day?

I didn't answer any of his questions because they have been debated here OVER AND OVER AND OVER by myself and others who are much more intelligent and more informed than I. What's the point of me again?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Y3a

Those who do not follow the details of the news fall for the inaccurate headlines, and believe that the news is factual, when in fact it is left biased.

The Hollywood left has it's pop culture icons stating leftist viewpoints as if it were facts, and so without any basis you get hatred from the mis-informed. There is also a follower mentality with the left too.

The appearance of Bush has been used to try and judge him, but that evaluatiuon wouldn't work on Stephen Hawking would it.

Most folks don't keep up with the news stories after a 1-2 days anyway, and miss the real outcome, instead they assume the writers opinions are facts.

Because you don't agree with what you hear on the news doesn't make it left biased, nor does it allow you to generalize.

The Right still does very well with talk radio, there are several right-centric newspapers, you have an entire TV network (a popular one), and a media filled with pussies who are afraid to ask the president hard hitting questions.

The media bias is not left vs. right, but spined vs. spineless, inane vs. deep, fluffy vs. substance, sensational vs. not. Conflict sells. News ratings fare better when people are trying to question the president, it makes for a sexier story. It doesn't matter what the depth of the story is.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

3) It's a "winner takes all" game, and that is what has happened when Bush got in. His replacement will do the same, whoever he is affiliated with.

The fact that many people see it as a winner takes all game is one of the biggest problems with our political system and country today.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

I'm sure there is more than this, but those are some thoughts. Another unrelated thought is that I would disagree that some elements of the right weren't equally loopy when Clinton was president. They did impeach him over virtually nothing, after all. But they didn't control the media and academia the way the left does, and so their voice was muted by the much larger number of sane people.

Great post. Sums things up well.

And I've noticed the tendency of folks to personalize politics for a number of years now, it's not a new thing. But it is disheartening. And I've seen more folks on the extreme Left willing to judge than those on the Right, perhaps corresponding to your first few reasons (gotta be frustrating).

[cavepainter]

About Clinton: "high crimes and misdemeanors" is open to what you want. I would have thought something like making a deal to let China get nuclear plans. Something GRAVE. That was a kangaroo court.

About Bush: not 'of the people by the people for the people'. More like 'of the Evengelicals, by the Evangelicals, for the Evangelicals.' They elected him, and he's shredding the Bill of Rights and other various articles of the Constituition for them. And big corps; rich friends, etc.

Oh, and he lied about Iraq. What a shameful waste of our brave young people.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by cavepainter

About Bush: not 'of the people by the people for the people'. More like 'of the Evengelicals, by the Evangelicals, for the Evangelicals.' They elected him, and he's shredding the Bill of Rights and other various articles of the Constituition for them. And big corps; rich friends, etc.

Oh, and he lied about Iraq. What a shameful waste of our brave young people.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

You make the OP's point beautifully.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by ghporter

The people the OP described as "the left" are just as fanatic as the people who flew planes into buildings four years ago today. Shame on them. They are just being pupets of the press that they listen to and party bosses. The same is true for "the right," who hold everything the RNC says to be Gospel. Just yacking and voting the straight party ticket is NOT being an involved citizen-it's just the particular brand of sheep you happen to be.

Very good points.
I think many of the people complaining here, left-wing bias here, whining there, … are just complaining about the image they see in the mirror.

[cavepainter]

Frankly, I'd prefer it if W had been like I had hoped; kinda like Truman.

He ain't.

I don't like theocracy.

If you interpret that as being 'ab ovo' the OP point...you're entitled to your opinion. Don't make it fact.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by besson3c

The fact that many people see it as a winner takes all game is one of the biggest problems with our political system and country today.

You bet!

Competition is the basis of capitalism! Why would a Republican President team up with the Left??? Why would the U.S. accept assistance without some retenue? Why is it that most on these boards claim high and loud that "U.S. is #1", has the "best democracy", etc?

Because failure is never an option! You are the best or you're not, and it is unacceptable to put a leader on top with the idea that he could ever fail!

"Working together" in NYCFarmboy's mind means: "The Left should turn to the Right!".

LOL!

The U.S. is a country built by go-getters and winners; those games are never won by "playing nice" and as one movie character put it: "I am a politician, which means I steal the candies from the babies while I am smiling at their mothers".

It's plain politics, wherever you are, whoever you represent and whatever ideas you stand for. It is slightly more ethical in some places and at certain times but honesty is always a double-edge knife.

You want to build a nice government working as a unified team? Go communist.



NYCFarmboy; you are a Liberal!

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by cavepainter

Frankly, I'd prefer it if W had been like I had hoped; kinda like Truman.

He ain't.

I don't like theocracy.

If you interpret that as being 'ab ovo' the OP point...you're entitled to your opinion. Don't make it fact.

The fact that you equate W's policies with a theocracy shows that you apparently don't even know what theocracy is.

Anyway…

In my area if a student even brings a bible to school he told he can't bring it again. They are not allowed to do ANYTHING openly religious on school grounds. I've heard all the separation of church arguments, and that's one thing, but to tell someone that they CAN"T practice religion on school grounds ON THEIR OWN…is THAT what you want? A violation of a basic freedom? How is THAT right?

This is coming from a die-hard, life long (yes, since I was a child old enough to even think about "God") Atheist.

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

NYCFarmboy; you are a Liberal!

I think I am probably a liberal in a earlier definition of that term.

I guess thats why I'm mushy in hoping that we can all just get along (sorta like Rodney King).




jokes aside: it does bother some of us though that people are still behaving as they do. Will they stop, some probably not, but I can still say it bothers me, and that it hurts my heart.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

You bet!

Competition is the basis of capitalism! Why would a Republican President team up with the Left??? Why would the U.S. accept assistance without some retenue? Why is it that most on these boards claim high and loud that "U.S. is #1", has the "best democracy", etc?

Because failure is never an option! You are the best or you're not, and it is unacceptable to put a leader on top with the idea that he could ever fail!

"Working together" in NYCFarmboy's mind means: "The Left should turn to the Right!".

LOL!

The U.S. is a country built by go-getters and winners; those games are never won by "playing nice" and as one movie character put it: "I am a politician, which means I steal the candies from the babies while I am smiling at their mothers".

It's plain politics, wherever you are, whoever you represent and whatever ideas you stand for. It is slightly more ethical in some places and at certain times but honesty is always a double-edge knife.

You want to build a nice government working as a unified team? Go communist.



NYCFarmboy; you are a Liberal!

Well said.. what do you guys think of this?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy

jokes aside: it does bother some of us though that people are still behaving as they do. Will they stop, some probably not, but I can still say it bothers me, and that it hurts my heart.

Many things hurt my heart too, but I will say that I think that (based on your first post), you aren't recognizing the overall complexity of the issue in reaching your judgement.

[cavepainter]

Let's just say that I think the grassroots folk responsible for polling GWB to WH would prefer not to let others 'think different'. Unless it's about Intelligent Design. And that his policies, and administrative choices (who gets what desk, and what they do there) are to appease that base.

Theocracy/Nazi...whatever. Patriot (Eric Blair Memorial) Act?

AND he LIED about Iraq. And it IS a shameful waste of our brave young people.

He ain't no Truman.

[Spliffdaddy]

I don't worry about the leftists.

Everyday their numbers are fewer.

Won't be very long until they're extinct.

They had their chance, ya know - for decades we tried their policies.

Now it's time for them to step aside.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I don't worry about the leftists.

Everyday their numbers are fewer.

Won't be very long until they're extinct.

They had their chance, ya know - for decades we tried their policies.

Now it's time for them to step aside.

And the erosion of our democracy by having a one party system would be a good thing?

It would make you and others as partisan as you the "winnah", but that's about it.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by smacintush

In my area if a student even brings a bible to school he told he can't bring it again. They are not allowed to do ANYTHING openly religious on school grounds. I've heard all the separation of church arguments, and that's one thing, but to tell someone that they CAN"T practice religion on school grounds ON THEIR OWN…is THAT what you want? A violation of a basic freedom? How is THAT right?

This is coming from a die-hard, life long (yes, since I was a child old enough to even think about "God") Atheist.

Bringing a Bible to school shouldn't be forbidden doing anything openly religious at school should be. Public schools funded by public tax dollars should not have anything to do with ANY religious activity. If students and/or their parents want them to engage in religious activity while at school send them to a religious school. If engaging in religious activity during the school day is so important why would they even bother to attend a public school?

No one is saying to students they can't embrace a religious faith nor practice the tenets of that faith. They are simply being told that practicing their religion in a public, secular school is not permissible as it violates a fundamental principle on which this country was founded. Again, I ask: If students and/or their parents want them to engage in religious activity while at school why don't they attend a religious school?

[cavepainter]

Gee, a one-party system? What a novel idea!

Let's see...Communists....Nazis...theocracy...hmmm....wo rks for me!

Of course, the reality is it's already a one party system:

MONEY
NON-VOTERS

[IceBreaker]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I don't worry about the leftists.

Everyday their numbers are fewer.

Won't be very long until they're extinct.

They had their chance, ya know - for decades we tried their policies.

Now it's time for them to step aside.

Amen.

don't have any tears for the lunatics... they have relegated themselves to the trashcan of history.

let the moonbats continue to hate, they are adults, they are living with the consequences of their stupidity.... don't feel sorry for them, they brought it upon themselves.

[Spliffdaddy]

You lefties need to have a broader perspective on things.

For the next few decades the right will be running the show - just as the left ran the show decades before.

So, it ain't a "one-party" system. It's many different parties running the show one at a time.

Kick back and relax. Dubya's on stage until 2008.

Ya'll still have 3+ years to figure out how to get back in power.

But I can tell you that the Hillary thing is a really bad idea.

Personally, I'd rather you guys just keep doing exactly what you're doing. Focus on Dubya, instead of your shortcomings.

You make this so easy for us righties.

Here's some advice...

Don't be so concerned about who's President. That dude ain't got the authority to do jack. He can't even spend your money.

While you've been mesmerized by our President, you've lost control of the real power! ie; Local, State, Senate, House.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy

What do people on here think is the reason why there is so much hatred by those on the left for their perceived enemies, in particular President Bush.

I don't think there's any difference in rational between Liberal hatred of Bush and Conservative hatred of Clinton.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

You lefties need to have a broader perspective on things.

For the next few decades the right will be running the show - just as the left ran the show decades before.

So, it ain't a "one-party" system. It's many different parties running the show one at a time.

Kick back and relax. Dubya's on stage until 2008.

Ya'll still have 3+ years to figure out how to get back in power.

But I can tell you that the Hillary thing is a really bad idea.

Personally, I'd rather you guys just keep doing exactly what you're doing. Focus on Dubya, instead of your shortcomings.

You make this so easy for us righties.

Here's some advice...

Don't be so concerned about who's President. That dude ain't got the authority to do jack. He can't even spend your money.

While you've been mesmerized by our President, you've lost control of the real power! ie; Local, State, Senate, House.

I love how your use of language so transparently reveals your feelings here. "Instead of *your* shortcomings", "us righties", "you lefties"... this really is a big football to you isn't it? You'd prefer if it were a one-party system, don't you?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I don't worry about the leftists.

Everyday their numbers are fewer.

Won't be very long until they're extinct.

They had their chance, ya know - for decades we tried their policies.

Now it's time for them to step aside.

Two terms of Republican rule, and you're declaring the Democrats on the road to extinction? Tell me, what are todays "leftists" numbers and what were the "rightie" numbers during Clinton's reign?

[Spliffdaddy]

PS,

The only reason a person seeks to "compromise" is when they would otherwise lose the battle of ideas. It's a form of surrender.
I don't elect representatives with the expectation of seeing them compromise on their policies and ideals. You either win or you lose.
Compromise is the root cause of nations not becoming superpowers. Nobody wins and everybody loses.
Your computer doesn't compromise. It's either a 1 or a 0, right? It doesn't compromise every now and again and assign a value of .5
When I hear the call for compromise - I see loser's lips moving.

[Wiskedjak]

When I hear the call for compromise, I see an enlightened person

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I love how your use of language so transparently reveals your feelings here. "Instead of *your* shortcomings", "us righties", "you lefties"... this really is a big football to you isn't it? You'd prefer if it were a one-party system, don't you?

I'd prefer it if several different parties *all* had my same beliefs.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

PS,

The only reason a person seeks to "compromise" is when they would otherwise lose the battle of ideas. It's a form of surrender.
I don't elect representatives with the expectation of seeing them compromise on their policies and ideals. You either win or you lose.
Compromise is the root cause of nations not becoming superpowers. Nobody wins and everybody loses.
Your computer doesn't compromise. It's either a 1 or a 0, right? It doesn't compromise every now and again and assign a value of .5
When I hear the call for compromise - I see loser's lips moving.

I'm sorry to say that even though I'm Canadian, I understand how your system of democracy was designed better than you.

This is just flat out dangerous and foolish to advocate. I don't wish to live under an oppressive system of government that does whatever they want regardless of the wishes of the citizens and residents of the country (who wouldn't necessarily go along with whatever the elected party would want to do, esp. with no check or balance they could trust to exist).

What you are describing sounds more like Marxism to me.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'd prefer it if several different parties *all* had my same beliefs.

So, because there isn't a *single* issue you disagree upon that the Republicans represent (which I would find hard to believe if you'd claim this is the case), you would rather that the Democrats and any opposition cease to exist?