http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110010861

The problem is that its the republicans who poisoned the well with their Clinton Hatred, long before anyone had heard of George W. Bush outside of his failed careers in the oil and baseball businesses.

For the republicans to now be the ones trying to call for reasoned tolerance, while they tear their opponents to shreds, is the height of hypocrisy.

I mean please, Republicans regularly accuse Democrats of being traitors, collaborating with the enemy, wanting American troops to fail, and "supporting the terrorists".

OF COURSE the Republicans want the Democrats to be nice and tolerant, because that way the Republicans can keep savaging the democrats without any consequences.  The biggest mistake Clinton made against his opponents and their constant attacks and persecution of him (some Republicans were quite public about wanting Clinton impeached from the moment he took office) was in not being forceful enough in his response.

Hell, Clinton should have been more like Bush is now. He should have portrayed his enemies as traitors to america, and declare himself untouchable.

So please, do get a grip: What strikes me as so absolutely deceitful about this is that whenever a right winger complains about the "Hatred toward the president", what they really want is for Bush to be above all criticism.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditOF COURSE the Republicans want the Democrats to be nice and tolerant

It also plays into the dichotomy of:
Republicans - Strong, Macho
Democrats - Weak, Sensitive

It would be (yet another) stupid move for the democrats to be nice and tolerant of the poor job George W Bush is doing as president.  I mean... isn't that the JOB of the opposition party?  If they're not going to do it -- what are they good for?

If Bush is more hated than Clinton was in his day it only shows that to reach such depths of unpopularity you have to be both personally disliked and professionally incompetent.

Clinton is kinda sleazy. You probably wouldn't want him hanging around your sister at a wedding. So he raised the ire of that portion of the electorate who look to their political leaders to be virtuous personal role models.

Bush has the dumb insouciance of the privileged. You wouldn't want him to tutor your kids in any subject other than golf. He annoys those voters who like their leaders to be curious and thoughtful.

But Bush has also demonstrated himself to be hopelessly incompetent. While being a hands-off leader isn't necessarily a bad thing in itself, it is when you surround yourself with cronies and inexperienced ideologues. The only constituency Bush has any more are dyed-in-the-wool Republicans who feel compelled to defend him simply because Democrats hate him, and those conservative Evangelicals who will look past any incompetence in a politician who they consider one of their own.

Well, I sit firmly in the middle. I'm not for or against any party, but here's how I see it:

#1- Bush is an horrible president. Anyone who argues otherwise must be blind,deaf, and stupid.

#2- The Republicans have brought most of the hate on themselves. The number of resignations,scandals, and shady dealing of the republicans have far surpassed the Dems.

#3- Dems are hopeless. They should be killing the Republicans in the polls and pushing their agenda but have managed to shoot themselves in the foot with inaction at every moment.

#4- Dems have allowed themeselves to be painted as liberals and liberal candidates rarely win anything outside of Minnesota.

Quote from: McrowWell, I sit firmly in the middle. I'm not for or against any party, but here's how I see it:

#1- Bush is an horrible president. Anyone who argues otherwise must be blind,deaf, and stupid.

#2- The Republicans have brought most of the hate on themselves. The number of resignations,scandals, and shady dealing of the republicans have far surpassed the Dems.

#3- Dems are hopeless. They should be killing the Republicans in the polls and pushing their agenda but have managed to shoot themselves in the foot with inaction at every moment.

#4- Dems have allowed themeselves to be painted as liberals and liberal candidates rarely win anything outside of Minnesota.

Yes, nicely in the middle. :raise:

Quote from: James J SkachYes, nicely in the middle. :raise:

Well, I admit, the last 8 years or so I've leaned a little more toward the Dems. Historically, I've not voted based on party. It so happens that I have issues with both parties, but the problems I have with the Republicans are on issues that are much more important. The problems I have with the Dems are much less problematic for me, at this point.

Quote from: McrowWell, I admit, the last 8 years or so I've leaned a little more toward the Dems. Historically, I've not voted based on party. It so happens that I have issues with both parties, but the problems I have with the Republicans are on issues that are much more important. The problems I have with the Dems are much less problematic for me, at this point.

All of which, Mcrow, I have no problem with.  It's the claim, then, that you are firmly in the middle. No offense, but you obviously are not.

Quote from: James J SkachAll of which, Mcrow, I have no problem with.  It's the claim, then, that you are firmly in the middle. No offense, but you obviously are not.

Jim,
I think you misunderstand. I will translate from Mike-ese. Mike means his political party leanings are in the middle, but his views on Bush, the individual, are obviously in the "He is incompetent" camp. I have to say, I think you would have to stretch your imagination to make Bush sound like the president he seems to think he is.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltJim,
I think you misunderstand. I will translate from Mike-ese. Mike means his political party leanings are in the middle, but his views on Bush, the individual, are obviously in the "He is incompetent" camp. I have to say, I think you would have to stretch your imagination to make Bush sound like the president he seems to think he is.

Bill

Could be - I don't hang out enough over at the Hinterwelt forums (and I've not had the chance to game with Mike as I believe you have), so I could be misinterpreting.

I'm taking my cue, however, from his own description that his problems with the Dems are not as great as his problems with the GOP. I see that he's not affiliated with any party, I've just never equated that with being politically in the middle.

As a side note, I'm never fond of arguments that start with if-you-think-otherwise-you-must-be-blind-deaf-and-stupid. So it could be that this influenced my reading of his later statements. This is not to say that I think Bush is a great president (I honestly think we won't know for 20, 30, 40 years - like any president), just that to write off the other side as ignorant  seems part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I don't hate Bush, I hate his policies (I reserve hate for individuals to cable company representatives and construction contractors  ), and he is probably a pretty nice guy in person, but he is hopelessly incompetent, and his refusal to see the incompetence of his underlings and dismiss them in a timely manner has really hurt his reputation and the country. The only thing that is keeping him off of the #1 spot of the worst president in history is the economy has not completely melted down (yet).

Anyone who hates Bush is insane.

And people who make extreme statements should be lined up against a wall and sho -

Quote from: James J SkachAll of which, Mcrow, I have no problem with.  It's the claim, then, that you are firmly in the middle. No offense, but you obviously are not.

As Bill pointed out almost all of my problems with the Republicans stem from Bush. As I pointed out I have a problem with both parties, but at this time Republicans seem to be on the wrong side of most important issues to me.

When I say I'm in the center what I mean is that I don't vote strictly GOP or DFL agenda. I also don't rule out voting for someone based on their party. My political manifesto bridges both parties, I have some very conservative views and some very liberal views but most of my views are closer to the middle. Heck, I liked McCain, Fred Thompson sounded interesting for a while.  

As for my "deaf, blind, and dumb" statement. I wasn't being literal with that, just pointing out that no matter what side of the matter I look at Bush from I can't see how anyone could approve of him. I'm a pretty open minded guy but I just can't figure out how anyone can think he is even an average president.

Quote from: RPGPunditSo please, do get a grip...

Wow.  Pundit speaks my mind, virtually to a word.

Thank you.

!i!

Quote from: James J SkachYes, nicely in the middle. :raise:

Yeah, unfortunately for those of us of a like mind, it's Piggy-in-the-Middle.

!i!