Posted on 11/27/2007 10:25:19 PM PST by smoothsailing
If Hillary Clinton wins we'll see what irrational hatred really is.
I believe the credit was misplaced. I personally don't think Clinton would have done "welfare reform"..if the Pubbies didn't have the majorities in the houses.
It was just another "stick his finger in the wind" moment..for him.
All of course...IMHO.
btt
It's obvious that the so-called leaders on both sides of the aisle have made the left and right despise each other enough that we dont talk to each other any more without automatically calling each other liars, boot lickers or kool-aid drinkers.
Neither side has all the answers in this country and sooner or later, we'll need to come together or the country will fail.
I want to thank you for my new tag line. That’s a keeper on the same scale as Savages statement that liberalism is a mental disorder.
Name Republican leaders anywhere who behaved as the Unamerican Dems have? (where do you think Republicans get their nickname as the stupid party, and as spineless, over the decades?)
Al Gore, a DEMOCRAT, who began THEIR hysteria by refusing to concede in the election of a United States President, for the good of his country. (as other good men had done before him)
They and their media then started a campaign to de-legitimize President Bush, saying he STOLE the election, knowing it was a lie.
They then began accusing him of lying to go to war, being cold hearted and sinister enough to kill soldiers for his own political and financial gain. He, the VP and staff have been drug thru the mud and been slandered as corrupt, evil, have been investigated and thrown in jail by rogue CIA officers.
The Dims in Congress and our Intell agencies have leaked intell to their MSM sabotage our war efforts, have aided, abetted and comforted the enemy in two war theaters, leading to God knows what on the battlefield for our soldiers.
No, calling them vampires who suck the lifeblood out of their country everyday does not dehumanize them at all, they admittedly call their actions a proud “dissent”, and they have proved everyday that they are no longer the loyal opposition, but an enemy to the Untied States.
Show me where a Republican has undermined his President, sabatoged his country, abetted and comforted our enemies at a time of war?
I believe most of their hate and anger stems from their
inherent sense of superiority, elitism, and arrogance.
They DESERVE to be in power, and anything else is some sort of evil aberration.
To understand why leftists are arrogant, elitist, and self-superior, you should read “A Conflict of Visions” by Sowell. Leftists believe all decisions should come down from an elite few at the top of the power structure.
Of course you rest your case, because you don’t have one.
Giuliani (YOU just posted this "Yes, one must vote for a lifelong abortion foe, or we will go to hell, lose our soul and become unprincipled scum of the earth." here, Bush (think education and medicare at least), McCain and every damn Republican that ever voted for a tax increase under the progressive tax system, minimum wage, anything dealing with Social Security that isnt specifically to abolish it, gerrymandering or any gun control measure. Should I continue?
see #71. Lady, you’re a loon from the right.
There is something positive about the two Cs, Jimmah Cahtuh, or the other two? Who would have guessed.
Michael Frazier
Anyway, your policy differences with the hundreds of politicians elected BY YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS, who beg for more gov largess, and more gov power, year after year, is not the subject here.
And you know it.
Name a time when the Republican Party, has undermined his President overseas in wartime, leaked intell to our enemies, aided and abetted our enemies, sabotaged and propagandized against their country?
You cannot.
My 87 year old mother, otherwise as sharp as a tack, is an F.D.R. democrat and there's no talking politics with her. She gets down right irrational and I know her blood pressure is soaring. I never bring up anything political with her and when she does, I change the subject.
I've seen the theory that he knew in advance that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked. Reminds me of the mindless liberals who think Bush knew about 9/11 in advance (Or even master minded it).
Maybe you should have put a sarc tag on there. Your fault, not mine.
You know, I didnt pay attention to you changing the subject. I never said Republicans undermined a lib pres during war.
I said the right actively demonizes the left just as the left does to us and you know it.
We will have to agree to disagree, I thought I explained myself thoroughly in post #56, before you even posted to me.
I have never, ever, ever, heard the Republican Party dehumanize Dems. They accuse them of wanting big gov? They admit it, hardly demonization.
But I have heard for decades upon decade, Dems outwardly calling Republicans racists, bigots, homophobes, sexists, wanting to starve children and kill old people, wanting polluted water and air, warmongers, hating poor people, and on and on.
Here’s another analysis of the Left’s hatred for Pres. Bush, which is really a hatred for all moderate and conservative Americans:
http://www.talkaboutgovernment.com/group/alt.politics.usa/messages/623416.html
Oh, my yes, and it isn't restricted to the left although their insistent secular element trends that direction. I'm working on a thought I read in Paul Hollander's The End Of Commitment that seems pertinent here so I'll offer a little of it for a proper FR thrashing.
It concerns the source of morality. Commonly (and not only in Western cultures, nor even in monotheisms) that source is religion; that is, a God's-eye view if not God Himself is posited as the perspective from which everyone's behavior is assessed. When individuals within that culture reject religion as a source of morality that source devolves to politics.
This has some interesting effects. Politics as a source of morality is inherently tribal; that is, the perspective from which one's behavior is assessed is that of one's political affiliation. That can be economic class in classic Marxism or the race/sex/sexual preference trinity within the modern Left. Foucault treated it as a base axiom to his approach to all of politics.
The upshot is that that behavior that is considered to advance the interest of that political affiliation is considered moral; that which serves to act against it is immoral.
It is for this reason that partisans can project a level of hatred on such a lightning rod as Vice President Cheney, for one example. Note that nearly none of those involve specifics. They take the form of "looking out for his friends in Big Oil" or "trampling on the Constitution" or "taking our civil rights away," and when the accuser is pressed for specific incidents he or she treats that as a threat. When that accuser has only abstractions to offer clearly some standard other than specific activities is in place.
This is seductive for partisans on both sides because ideology is an intellectual short-cut, a substitute for the taxing necessity of judging individual acts by universal standards which often conflict in the real world. "He's not from my tribe, hence he's wrong" is considerably easier and often one hasn't the information necessary to go beyond it anyway. That failing is occasionally mine as much as anyone else's.
Tribalism, unfortunately, begets tribalism. One who has proclaimed him- or herself your enemy may often not be dealt with on any other basis however noble your intentions. Someone who excuses violence against you based on some class affiliation has fully accepted politics as the sole source of morality. They might someday be talked out of it but in the meantime they'll kill you.
Just some thoughts on the topic of politics and tribal hatred - criticism is welcomed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.