Posted on 03/06/2004 7:32:03 PM PST by crushkerry
There’s that word again. ‘Divisive.’ Other than ‘evil’ or possibly ‘nazi,’ it’s the word liberals most often use to describe George W. Bush and his administration’s policies.
It first surfaced when America was gearing up for war in Iraq. Every news agency imaginable called it a ‘divisive issue’ or used its variant cousin to say America was ‘divided’ on the issue. This despite the fact that during the build up to war we never saw a survey that showed more than 13% of the American people strongly opposed to toppling Saddam through force of arms.
’Divisive’ in newspeak apparently means ‘to united the majority of the country behind a single just cause or action.’ Nevertheless, the Left and their echo chamber in the mainstream press did their best to portray America as torn into two equal parts, pro-war and anti-war.
Well, they’re at it again and this time the issue is gay marriage. George W. Bush, you see, is a horribly ‘divisive’ president because he supports an amendment to stop gay marriage.
Yet there is a pretty consistent split against gay marriage in virtually every poll out there on this issue. So while, yes, technically speaking the nation is ‘divided’ on the issue, there is a clear majority and a clear minority.
Take, for example, this little news item from National Public Radio:
“Gay marriage and civil unions will be among the most divisive issues of the 2004 presidential election, according to the latest NPR poll.
The study, conducted by Republican pollster Bill McInturff and Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg, found that 56 percent of respondents are opposed to gay marriage, while 30 percent support it.”
30 percent.
Still others attribute all that ‘divisiveness’ to George W. Bush himself. A quick Google on the words ‘Bush’ and ‘divisive’ yields almost 82,000 references. The official response from the Democrat National Committee to Bush’s endorsement of the constitutional amendment to stop gay marriage was titled Democrats Respond to Bush's Push for Divisive Amendment. Even rare accolades for Bush from Big Media use the word, such as this headline from the Boston Globe: Bush demonstrates willingness to tackle divisive cultural issues.
We at crushkerry.com wonder if anyone in Big Media or the Democrat Party has considered that perhaps, since they represent a deep minority on this issue, that they, not George Bush or the Republicans, are the source of this ‘divisiveness.’
Let’s be clear … a group of intelligent and highly manipulative gay rights attorneys decided to challenge gay marriage laws in states with extremely liberal Supreme Courts. They chose Hawaii, Vermont and Massachusetts. From there they plan to use the “Full Faith and Credit” clause of the U.S. Constitution to force every other state in the union to recognize gay marriage. Massachusetts took the bait first. That means the most liberal State Supreme Court in the country will force gay marriage -- which is supported by roughly 30% of the population – on every other state in the nation.
Right. And George W. Bush is ‘divisive.’
But "divisive" would be a nonsensical criticism even if it were used accurately. What does "divisive", accurately used, really mean? I suppose one can imagine an issue X on which 100% of people agree; clearly that would not be "divisive" at all. If 90% believe X while 10% disagree, that's slightly more "divisive". And so on, until the maximum "divisiveness" is reached if/when there is some issue X on which the nation is evenly split 50-50.
In short, the most "divisive" issue possible is a 50-50 one.
But how is that, in and of itself, a criticism?
Calling some issue "divisive" (if done accurately) is saying nothing more and nothing less than "I disagree, and so does half the country, even though half the country agrees with you". Uh, so what?? That's why we have a two-party system isn't it? For some (D) to think that an (R) issue is "divisive" means the two-party is working, it means the (R)s are truly representing people on one side of an issue, while the (D)s are representing people on the other side of an issue. that's good not bad.
The true criticism being levelled when a (D) calls an (R) "divisive" is this: "you're a Republican".
To (D)s, being an (R) is "divisive".
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.