Replies

Well, you were never at my house. My Dad gushed as much as it is possible for a grown man with a good head on his shoulders TO gush, and it was the same with a lot of men his age. And I think it was due to *sheer relief* that Carter was gone and somebody decent was in there lowering there damned taxes and telling them they weren't the devil for working hard and earning money and doing the things that men were supposed to do. Sound familiar?

We were all relieved and jubilant - no gushing. I guess we were raised differently. We were taught politicians were our employees and that to be a good employer, we should keep our eye on them. I have never felt any politician, President on down was worth of adoration, or love (except as a human being, one of God's creations) - perhaps I owe these people an apology - I just thought all conservatives and Republicans were like the ones I knew. Very tough taskmasters and very independent people.

Believe me when I tell you I thought the 'gushing' adoration, love, that was directed at Clinton was just Democratic nonsense. I really thought the Republicans were an aberration - that is amazing.

And Bush hasn't achieved Reagan status yet in terms of adoration. Sure, there are some women who gush. So what> Doesn't mean they're going to allow him to lead them into hell.

But are you sure? How long would it be before some people would begin asking questions? What do you think it would take to make them ask questions?

There's no way to compare then and now though, really, because forums like this did not exist then. Pity, they would have been extremely useful. Possibly we could have avoided Carter. And youknow-who.

Now that is a thought - but you are right, things are different and people are different. Do you think people who post on these forums are different from people who don't post here? I find that I am not that different from other REpublicans, or conservatives, I know. Is it a need to have a 'leader' or some such? I am asking for you thoughts - it isn't meant to be insulting - but I have never felt I needed a 'leader' - I certainly never felt I needed a President to be a leader - I wasn't raised that way.

We were all relieved and jubilant - no gushing. I guess we were raised differently.

Men most certainly "gushed" over Reagan, in their own fashion. Deal with it. I could say they "kvelled" (if you're familiar with the Yiddish term) for the entire eight years Reagan was in office and it would mean the same thing. There was not merely respect for the man, but also sincere gratitude and affection. No need to quibble over adjectives. That's how they felt. It did not lessen their manhood, it did not mean they were worshipping him, it did not mean they were following blindly. It didn't mean anything except that they really, really, really liked the man. He gave them reason to like him.

We were taught politicians were our employees and that to be a good employer, we should keep our eye on them. I have never felt any politician, President on down was worth of adoration, or love (except as a human being, one of God's creations) - perhaps I owe these people an apology - I just thought all conservatives and Republicans were like the ones I knew. Very tough taskmasters and very independent people.

Having positive feelings about a president does not necessarily lessen one's toughness or reduce one's independence.

Believe me when I tell you I thought the 'gushing' adoration, love, that was directed at Clinton was just Democratic nonsense.

It was. Again, I refer to the object the feelings were bestowed upon, and the reason for bestowing them. The feelings in themselves are rather value-neutral. I don't believe in moral equivalence, so the existence of similar feelings in both cases does not constitute "the same thing".

People who loved equality of outcome, catering to the lowest common denominator, multiculturalism, and on down the list of things I hate adored Clinton. Hell, they probably got big old lumps in their throats when Clinton and his 67-million-dollar entourage of parasites sailed into Vietnam with our flag lowered. The people that secretly or openly want America brought down to her knees just loved the guy, because he was giving them what they wanted. And he gave it to them over and over and over, while thumbing his nose at the rest of us.

I really thought the Republicans were an aberration - that is amazing.

Some Republicans are fairly giddy about Bush, for the same reason some people were giddy about Clinton -- because he is giving us some of what WE want. It does not mean it's the same thing! As I said, I don't believe in moral equivalence. Bush's agenda may not be all right, but Clinton's was objectively wrong.

Personally I could just kiss Bush on the face for picking a Secretary of State who will never, ever go dancing with Kim Jong Il (and I don't even like Powell) I was so sick of that crop of losers in Clinton's cabinet that I could have died. But are you sure? How long would it be before some people would begin asking questions? What do you think it would take to make them ask questions?

You persist in the assumption that no one "asks questions". I'm starting to think that when you say "ask questions" you really mean "renounce him because we're not supposed to like him so much". If so, the answer to "how long" and "what would it take" is the same --- he'd have to earn it, the same way he earned their respect.

Do you think people who post on these forums are different from people who don't post here? I find that I am not that different from other REpublicans, or conservatives, I know.

Why yes, they're different. Because unless they're plugged into a large acquaintance of conservative people some other way, they're isolated. Not much of a problem in the Red Zone, where most people have common sense. Big problem in the Blue Zone, where the liberal/conservative ratio is laughably asymmetrical and which also happens to be where the power centers are, and where elections are stolen...

it a need to have a 'leader' or some such?

No, in my case it's a need for company. Before I got a computer I thought you could fit all the conservatives in Manhattan into one booth at a diner.

There are some things you just can't share with liberal co-workers, and in this city that's about all anyone has.

It's also a need for information, which I might not get otherwise, and a need to compare notes.

I'm asking for you thoughts - it isn't meant to be insulting

It isn't, unless you were intending to cast a slur upon my father for "adoring Ronald Reagan...

- but I have never felt I needed a 'leader' - I certainly never felt I needed a President to be a leader - I wasn't raised that way.

Again with the "raising".

Listen. The nation was designed to have a leader, so you do in fact need one. The question is what sort of leader. The people chose disastrously in the case of Clinton and much more wisely in the case of Bush. That doesn't make him a Tiffany diamond, it just makes him a HUGE step up.

If, when you say you don't need a leader, you really mean you don't need an idol, then I agree.