What Makes The Bush Haters So Mad? (They're Two-Bong-Hit William Blakes?)

www.time.com ^ | Monday, Sep. 22, 2003 (They don't call it Time Mag. for nothing.) | By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

[jonascord]

We have GOOD REASONS to hold BJ and his wife in contempt. Clinton and Clinton fils are crooks, liars, thieves, quite probably murderers, and sociopathic communist sympathizers.

Democrats hate Bush because irrational hatred and contempt is what they do best. Every time GW side-steps a trap, beats them in a double-shuffle, gives them room to make a choice with the full knowledge that they will pick the one that will do themselves the most damage, a few more people wake up to the fact they have been played for fools by the clintons.

I offer, as an example, all the temples in the US who could send money to the Jewish Defense League AND the democrat's party.

[RobbyS]

Well, all those things, too. But I think it is basically personal. If you are a liberal Texan like Moyers or Rather who has gotten ahead by sucking up to the Eastern Establishment, someone like Bush who chose not to, and who--I think--despises
toadies and renegades like the aforesaid, really sticks in their craw. But you have got to know that Moyers--someone who I have met--is a raving fanatic underneath it all.

[arasina]

"...denounces George W. Bush's "government of, by and for the ruling corporate class..."

I'm not a member of the so-called "ruling corporate class" and I wholeheartedly support President Bush. I have lots of relatives, none of which are corporate bigwigs or wealthy, who support Dubya. And what does Bill Moyers seem to be? He's not exactly a member of the hardworking middle "class" (Can you tell I dislike using that term?) and you can go on down the list of those Dim candidates and pretty much say the same about them. The "richest" member of my immediate family is the one who hates President Bush with a passion. Is the world upsidedown or what?

[F16Fighter]

"If you are a liberal Texan like Moyers or Rather who has gotten ahead by sucking up to the Eastern Establishment, someone like Bush who chose not to, and who--I think--despises toadies and renegades like the aforesaid, really sticks in their craw."

Yes, I agree that Dubya may be perceived as betraying his class -- and thus rejecting the same elitism that the Democrats AND French seem to share....

[F16Fighter]

"My husband feels the same way."

Great -- Tell 'em we'll meet at Mel Gibson's house in the year 2023 and recreate that last scene from 'Patriot.'

[ohioWfan]

The presence of the LIGHT in George W. Bush's heart exposes the darkness of the evil one in his foes.

This is spiritual warfare, to be sure, and it's not hard to tell what side the Democrat party is on......

[gakrak]

PTL, you have nailed it.
God Bless GWB.

[OESY]

The pretender had not just seized the throne. He was acting like a king. Nay, an emperor.

Anyone have the same reaction I did to these sentences? What did Krauthammer fall asleep during his essay? He didn't call Bush the "so-called pretender" and as such Krauthammer seems to be pandering to his Time Magazine audience, even as he deconstructs Dem reasoning, if any. If Bush's opponent, Al Whatshisname, was blindsided by the existence of the Electoral College, he wasn't smart enough to be president. Moreover, how many kings or emperors does Krauthammer know that have gone before the UN Security Council and gotten a 15-0 vote to take serious enforcement measures against Iraq if Saddam doesn't comply with 17 resolutions or go into exile?

Dems hate Bush because his successes frustrate them, the war on terror gives Republicans a long-term advantage, the stock market/economy/jobs are coming back strongly in time for 2004, Bush has taken (or has the potential to take)nearly every other issue away from Democrats with the help of two houses of Congress, the Dem instinct is to ridicule intelligence/demonize individuals/mischaracterize issues and it's not working this time, their circus of dwarf candidate hopefuls is weak/extreme -- foreboding another McGovern-like loss, and they have no one to blame but themselves and their anti-Bush/anti-America policies. Like it's hard to admit you're wrong, that everything you believe in is meaningless or self-destructive, and that Dems will have to live with that situation for many years. (Whew, glad I got that off my chest.)

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"They are clearly and viciously waging as much a war as they can today through the media and the subversion of the courts -- Civil War II isn't out of realm within the next 20-25 years IMO.

My husband feels the same way."

Me three...

[Brasil]

The RATS hate all Republicans and would pour their venom on any of them who became President because they were taken in by Voldemort and his eight years of telling the country that all Republicans were greedy, mean-spirited, extremist, etc. demons who never did the country any good.

[Tarl]

The Liberal minded agenda is fed through unchecked emotion, the mania that grips them now is akin to that when passengers finally accept that their pleasure cruise ship has taken on irreparable damage and sinking is inevitable.

It started with denial (2000 election), which to me, evoked the nostalgia from the Wizard of Oz when Dorothy threw the bucket of water and “melted” the wicked witch. The witch cursed her for bringing an end to her plans, she lamented on how bad the world was as she shriveled to nothingness. This reminded me of the Democrats shock then utter contempt for the man who overcame their wicked plans.

Well, that denial phase is over and now following the 2002 “sweep”, the realization of their desperation is operating full bore. They snub their noses at his honesty and moral conviction and they loathe him for NOT being the idiot they imagine him to be, which riles them even more. The polls are THEIR lifeline and no matter how many times they ask their mirror (the polls) “Who’s the better party for our times?” they get the same response “The REPUBLICANS, of course”

[Turbodog]

"No one expect much of FDR when he became president, but he picked up the ball and ran with it."

How? By extending the depression 9 more years and then selling out to Stalin?

[Winfield]

Puleez!!! There is no comparison between Bush and
Clinton! Shame on Americans if you do not loath having one
with the morals of a barnyard animal, holding the office of President of the U.S.A. I guess it is understandable that, if you loved Bubba, you would not understand nor be able to appreciate a man like "W", who believes in upholding the dignity, morals and high standards of the Presidency. Why people love a liar and fornicator over a man of high moral standards? "Tis a puzzlement!"

[FastCoyote]

"Almost like the pathological hatred many conservatives had for Bill Clinton ..."

With this difference - Clinton was a liar, a cheat, and committed demonstrable damage. Monica Lewinski was a security breach, Clinton's pardons obvious quid pro quos. How come Bush doesn't have a comparable string of dead bodies surrounding him?

Bush really has nowhere near the number of lightening rod issues to be hated. That doesn't mean his political decisions are correct, just that they are political, not venomous.

[Burkeman1]

Contrast the hatred of Bush to that of Clinton. Clinton "haters" had literally dozens of identifiable, specific, and concrete reasons and issues to hold Clinton in contempt. Look at hatred the Dems have Bush. Nothing but cliches like "government of, by and for the ruling corporate class."

When Moyers says that Bush is attempting "a deliberate, intentional destruction of the United States way of governing," he offers no examples. Republicans could actually number the ways in which Clinton was underming the constitution- not with hysterics about the "paytriot act" and the ways it could be used wrongly- but with real examples of criminality and utter disreagrd for the law.

And when it comes to the war in Iraq (which I oppossed and continue to do) Democrats and liberal blow hards like Al Franken and Moyers were utterly silent during Clintons almost unbelievable abuse of the use of military power based on total lies in Serbia and his two wag the bombings in Sudan and Iraq (he bombed Iraq the night before the impaeachment vote!)

Liberals have zero credibility when it comes to critcizing a basically decent man like Bush while they defended the totally obvious criminility of the sociopath Clinton for 8 loooong years.

[Doe Eyes]

Clinton "haters" had literally dozens of identifiable, specific, and concrete reasons and issues to hold Clinton in contempt.

I just blows my mind those liberals can't see its all Clinton's fault.

[RobbyS]

He dominated the scene.

[Burkeman1]

I just blows my mind those liberals can't see its all Clinton's fault.

Actually- the scary thing is that I believe most of them do know how bad Clinton was. Do you actually think Gephardt, Kerry, Terry Macauliffe, believe a word they say? I don't. They are corrupt power hungary gangsters. There isn't one elected democrat who actually believes the policies they advovate will help anyone but themselves.

[jackbob]

...unlike any since they had Richard Nixon to kick around.

Such short memories. Democrat's hate this President no more than they hated any other prior sitting Republican President. Their strategy to bring him down will be pretty much the same as with prior Republicans. Paint him as far right, and mentally not up to snuff. Then attempt to win the swing voters against him, without turning off the hard core Democrat.

Their problem, is finding a candidate that will win the hard core, while also reassuring the swing voter that they are not to far out. For Democrats, this as alway creates a real world dilemma.

[SunStar]

In Afghanistan, Bush rode a popular tide; Iraq, however, was a singular act of presidential will.

C'mon, Charles. You know this line is bogus. Between 58% and 70% supported the war in Iraq.