RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred

RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

popeye1250 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:07:20 AM)
I don't hate Bush I just don't think he's up to the job. He's neither Conservative nor Republican. He was put in the WH by big business and now they've set their sights on Hillary Clinton! "Follow the Money".

samboct -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:08:17 AM)
My apologies to the other folks who feel marginalized by neocons- I felt I was on reasonably sure footing around liberals since I am happy to call myself one, but yes, there are a number of folks of various persuasions who have plenty of reason to despise neocons and their "elected leader". Firm- haven't read the piece yet- and missed your response initially- hence I'm modifying this post. My visceral response is below-Having recently been to Berlin and visited the site of the Gestapo prisons at what used to be Prinz Albrechtrstrasse (now a hole with some rubble)- but a very informative look at the people that the Gestapo imprisoned along with the crimes they are charged with, there are some very disturbing parallels with this administrations actions in both Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. Terms like "heightened interrogation" and "connections with known radical groups" abound as the basis for imprisonment and torture. (And for those who think that membership in an organization justifies imprisonment- does what a person thinks mean that they should be in jail- or do we put people in jail when their actions put others at risk?) Also- for those that think the Gestapo prisons were large and extensive- they were a total of some two dozen cells. Yet, with the willing assistance of the police force- this prison and torture was sufficient to drown out the many dissenting voices to the Nazi regime (coupled with control of the press). From my perspective- For the neocons to bellyache about the death of civil debate, it seems to me that they're holding the bloody knife. Furthermore, this is incredible chutzpah- on par with Hitler's Big Lie psychology. (For those who don't know the definition of chutzpah- it's killing your parents and pleading for mercy in court because you're an orphan.) This isn't a "let's meet in the middle point" this is one of those- "no progress will be made till the transgressor takes responsibility for his misdeeds." For the neocons to blame the liberals for the breakdown in civilized debate is on par with Hitler blaming the Jews for Germany's economic woes. However- Firm- to your point that this is not really useful in terms of the points you've raised- I agree. The question is really who killed debate in the US and replaced it with bathos? Should the credit lie at the foot of the liberals who are now responding with bathos (agreed- reasoned debate has largely been replaced with inflamed rhetoric) or does the credit belong to the neocons? If credit does belong to the neocons- is the liberal response justified in any way? Historically- have the neocons use the bathos tactic before they were in power? Yup- the impeachment of Bill Clinton was certainly a triumph of emotion over principle. Did liberals succeed in impeaching Ronald Reagan over the Iran Contra affair? Both Presidents lied to Congress- one about his personal life, the other about funding for a revolutionary group in a foreign country. In order to carry the country toward impeachment-the neocons had to demonize Bill Clinton in a way which has weakened the oval office- who the hell wants a job where your extramarital affairs become cause for legal action in front of over 500 lawmakers? Did the liberals demonize Ronald Reagan? Don't think so- although there's another president that I despised. (But I think GWB is worse- god help us all.) So- historically, demonization seems to be the tool of the neocons. However, it's possible that the liberals adopted the tactics of the neocons in an effort to gain power. So let's look at that- By most liberals lights (and conservatives, and libertarians and socialists etc.)- GWB deserves to be impeached for flagrant violation of the constitution- claiming broad wartime powers to fight a non-existant threat. Yet Nancy Pelosi said that impeachment was off the table. (and I think that was a gutless decision.) If that isn't an olive branch- what is it? What measures of appeasement to the non-neocon people who now rather strikingly disapprove of this administrations actions have been offered? What are the measures which are compromises- a recognition that there is now a majority of citizens who strongly disapprove of the way that this administration is conducting itself? Has the Patriot act been struck down? Bear in mind that the executive branch lead by the neocons is in power-and that to have peace- it's the side that's in power that must take the first step. There is an alternative viewpoint- which is while the liberals were in power, the voices of conservatives and even neocons were afforded a seat at the table- Clinton said his best legislation was bipartisan. But bipartisanship seems to be sorely lacking- for the first 6 years of GWB's reign- it was a sick joke. Even today with a democratic majority in the house, there seems to be little real change in the country's course. From a liberal's standpoint- here is the conundrum. While the principles of a democracy call for the respect of everyone's viewpoint- when do the actions of the ruling party cross the line from democracy to tyranny? And if the ruling party is crossing the line from democracy to tyranny- and has not responded to reasonable concerns, voiced in a reasonable democratic fashion- what are the correct actions to take next? Is it time to bear arms against a tyranny? Plenty of liberals are actually armed- and so are libertarians, and so are conservatives. Hence- I agree that liberals are no longer debating politely with neocons. From my perspective- that polite debate has been tried and failed- and the country continues on its seemingly inexorable path towards tyranny. Saying that liberals have sacrificed their long standing ideals of listening to all sides with respect is certainly true- but I think it's an SOS response to an intolerable situation. Sam

BumbleBee2MsP -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:09:18 AM)
Please don't confuse hating what this currupt and incompitent administration is doing to this Country. That that gives to much credit and power to the bumbling boob that 'Bush-wacked" the Presidency What we hate is the constant deception. the illegal actions. the incompetent administration of resourses. the lack of justice. and the audacity to turn around and give medles to to the worst perperators and to punish those that are doing the right thing. i really don't hate bush, he isn't worth that much valuable emotion. Like Mr. T would say: "I pity the Fool."

mnottertail -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:14:36 AM)
ummmmmmmmm, I read it, and while most of what I say may go over your head, my friend, but I have taken an understandable and cogent positon since day one. My position is that a rather overwhelming change must take place, and if that includes a civil war, then it does. We are on the wrong side of history now, and that's a goddamn fact...I doubt our cleaning up our act will put us on the wrong side of history. You are blathering equally as fly by as the next guy......I see your many posts of your honorable and cogent arguments with malice towards none and how YOU rise above it, and EVERYBODY else is such lowbrow by comparisno and all that lofty bullshit has been cast aside and now you are in the gutter scuffling with us pigs. You better grab up a drink and relax.........Sinergy is gonna have some fun at your expense over this little peccadillo. Ron

Assman4u -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:20:46 AM)
Another favorite is that the president is stupid or dumb. I am a very intelligent person, college educated, I am a professional person. Over the years though I have learned not to presume that I am smarteter than others, in book learning anyways. But when a person calls the president dumb or stupid, do you honestly think a person that is not very intelligent could be the president, no matter who his father is??? Are you smarter than the president?? I do not think so!

mnottertail -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:24:33 AM)
Um, smart efuckingnuff to know what would happen in Iraq. Smart enough to know what would happen should a disaster strike that a man whos sole qualifications to the head job at FEMA was that he ran horse shows (often successfully) and supported george bush may not have been enough to recommend him to that position........... There are others, but that might be enough for you to discount right off..... Ron

Owner59 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:40:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY FR, All the above post confirm the point of the article. If you demonize your political opponents, isn't this dehumanizing them? And isn't dehumanizing the first step to killing, rather than engaging in the political process? Firm Oh stop with the exaggerations,firmhanky. The only people dying here, are our soldiers,and that`s real death.Not your fantasy kind. As far as bush goes, you can only 'engaging in the political process",with someone who also wants to.bush`s "my way or the highway" approach to politics,doesn`t really allow for a "process" or "engaging". He`s failure to gain a consciences, is his own fault.Don`t start blaming the world,when it doesn`t agree with your POV. If we were just talking about money,or a crime,it would be one thing.All those GIs lost,and the ones we`re going to lose,is what makes this very different. bush`s "let`s poke at it and see what happens" approach to the middle east, has been a deadly failure,and the biggest foreign policy failure sense Viet Nam.bush has fucked up,just about everything there is to fuck up.He`s got a year to screw the rest up,so pray for the best. Are you saying that 70-80 % of America ,is irrational? Is it irrational to see failure and say so? Or is this just a way of weaseling out of responsibility? Starting in with the,"I`m the victim"bullshit,is really pathetic,and sounds creepy and paranoid. bush lost his respect,one lie at a time.No one but the cool-aid drinkers,give him any credibility now.To blame normal regular people for that, is another sign of someone being out of touch. It seems that there is a lot of energy going into apologizing and being defensive.I know it`s not easy being a neo-con/republican right now.What w/ bush and all.But ya`ll can`t help yourselves,and so there you have it.People defending the indefensible,trying to excuse,the inexcusable. Maybe the neo-cons are afraid that what`s being said about them is really true.That Iraq is FUBAR and was a huge, deadly,bankrupting mistake.Sloughing off the criticism as irrational, is one way to cope with that.Especially, if making rational arguments or logical explanations, aren`t possible. To put a different point on it though,to believe that any of that article is true,you have to agree that the Clinton haters,were nothing more or less than the usual rabble.I don`t see them ever admitting to that.

popeye1250 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:45:03 AM)
Owner, I don't like the Clintons or the Bushs. What does that make me?

Owner59 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 10:49:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Owner, I don't like the Clintons or the Bushs. What does that make me? Fucked in both ends? Seriously Popeye,I`m pretty sure you hate Hillary. Yes?

popeye1250 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 11:04:55 AM)
LOL! Owner, you're "pretty sure I hate Hillary?" How can I "hate" someone I don't even know? LMAO! You're a FUNNY GUY!

Owner59 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 11:09:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: Firm The British/American system of democracy, however, is based on a principle that a civil society can have segments that disagree about issue, but still get along without erupting into killing to solve those political conflict. That is not the case by a damn sight in these systems. Since all this is OpEd, I am not going to elucidate further on that. And do not suppose that I have failed to notice your slipping in the 'killing' of George W. Fuckweasel from aspirant poetry to fact. Perhaps you will explain this very point to George W. Bush the same man that waltzed us into the jaws of global conflict and is solving political conflict in Iraq via these lofty aspirations. I call bullshit on the piece and the conclusions. what bullshit rhetoric, now everyone should have some empathetic feelings for fuckwads, because it is the meat and potatoes of the political system, and why can't we get along? Well, you reap what you sow, that is about how it works, except politically, your cup will runneth over in the most venomous currency in kind. Fuck that. Call Bullshit all you want, but you've not made a cogent argument or taken an understandable position. The last time, in the US, that the political process went down this road, we ended up with the Civil War. We almost had such a breakdown during the 60s. I am suggesting that we are on the road to a third one - and futher, that perhaps the "progressives" and "liberals" who are encouraging such a confrontation may find themselves on the wrong side of history this time. Firm PS. Did you even read the entire piece, or are you just blathering on based on a "fly by" of the three paragraphs that I quoted above? Recently,in a rights vs freedom thread,someone suggested nurses would be forced to masturbate patiants,if we forced pharmisists to fill PlanB scripts.Rediculous. To suggest that we`re heading towards a civil war, is just as rediculous. I am suggesting that we are on the road to a third one - and futher, that perhaps the "progressives" and "liberals" who are encouraging such a confrontation may find themselves on the wrong side of history this time. So you want 70 or 80 % of America to shush-up and enjoy the cool-aid with you. Isn`t it possible, that neo-cons have brought us to this place?That it`s they, that need to STFU and take their fanny whip`n. You`d(neo-cons) like to keep fucking up ,without being called on it? God help us....

Owner59 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 11:11:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 LOL! Owner, you're "pretty sure I hate Hillary?" How can I "hate" someone I don't even know? LMAO! You're a FUNNY GUY! <smiles>,I see a lot of Hill-hate`n from you.lol One man`s POV. You go!, Popeye.

luckydog1 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 11:45:59 AM)
The thing about Bush hatered (or any kind is that it makes you blind). 70-80% of America does not hate Bush. 34% want him removed from office, thanks for posting that poll yesterday owner59. http://www.collarchat.com/m_1410932/tm.htm I seriously doubt more than 1% hate him and want him to stay in office. Many people are not happy with Bush and do not support him, but that is a far cry from the hate which gets put out by some very vocal folks. Hatred causes you to read a poll like that and completely misunderstand it. I heard plenty of hate from the left towards Reagan, and have read volumes of hatred about Nixon. The idea that Political hate started in the 1990s is just nonsense. For the record, Clinton did not get impeached for getting a blow job. He was sued for sexuall harrassment (by a citizen). Lewinski was relevant to that suit because it was part of showing a pattern of him hitting on and rewarding employees who gave him sex. Clinton lied and broke other laws in an attempt to avoid the suit. It's not the crime its the coverup is something I have heard many times, most recently about Scooter Libby. Also Clinton's policies and regular bombing of Iraq, killed a lot (estimates in the millions were common when the sanctions were in place, I always thought those numbers to be exagerated, but there were absolutlly people being killed.), and really pissed off a lot of Muslims.

awmslave -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 12:35:35 PM)
quote: I think the hatred that is so pervasive and accepted by the "progressive left" in America is one of the two threads in modern US politics that bodes ill for the republic. I do agree with the post. I watch sometimes Bill Maher show and I feel strong discomfort. The same people who have gained great wealth as a result of US politics hate how the country functions. There is certainly strong element of irrationality how US liberal left sees the country. It will be interesting to see if change happens after democrats will win White House and the parlament.

bipolarber -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 12:57:41 PM)
Um... the parlament?

tightlockup -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 1:19:19 PM)
No matter how you feel about Bush, there are a lot of people who don't really have a basis for hating Bush but do so (or say they do so) because they think it will make them popular with people they want to accept them or will further their career.

Owner59 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 1:23:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 The thing about Bush hatered (or any kind is that it makes you blind). 70-80% of America does not hate Bush. 34% want him removed from office, thanks for posting that poll yesterday owner59. http://www.collarchat.com/m_1410932/tm.htm I seriously doubt more than 1% hate him and want him to stay in office. Many people are not happy with Bush and do not support him, but that is a far cry from the hate which gets put out by some very vocal folks. Hatred causes you to read a poll like that and completely misunderstand it. I heard plenty of hate from the left towards Reagan, and have read volumes of hatred about Nixon. The idea that Political hate started in the 1990s is just nonsense. For the record, Clinton did not get impeached for getting a blow job. He was sued for sexuall harrassment (by a citizen). Lewinski was relevant to that suit because it was part of showing a pattern of him hitting on and rewarding employees who gave him sex. Clinton lied and broke other laws in an attempt to avoid the suit. It's not the crime its the coverup is something I have heard many times, most recently about Scooter Libby. Also Clinton's policies and regular bombing of Iraq, killed a lot (estimates in the millions were common when the sanctions were in place, I always thought those numbers to be exagerated, but there were absolutlly people being killed.), and really pissed off a lot of Muslims. So if you`re saying that Clinton`s critics were rational,then you must also say the bush`s critics, are at least as rational. Though you`ll try to,you can`t have it both ways.That never stops a neo-con from having it both ways,in their minds.Just because it makes sense in your own head,doesn`t mean that it makes real sense.

Owner59 -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 1:27:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tightlockup No matter how you feel about Bush, there are a lot of people who don't really have a basis for hating Bush but do so (or say they do so) because they think it will make them popular with people they want to accept them or will further their career. And just who are those people you speak of? How is it you know what they`re thinking,and what their motivations are?

Alumbrado -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 1:35:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Um... the parlament? Thats what Hillary is going to call the legislature, after she wins the election, and declares herself Queen. [:D]

mnottertail -> RE: The Insanity of Bush Hatred (11/15/2007 1:35:34 PM)
OMFG!!!! We have wannabe Bush haters---- Is there no escaping the wannabes? Ken Watanabe

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125