Replies

Look at the way some of you swarmed after Joe Hadenuf. Too much.

As I see it, there's a pretty simple dynamic in play that's chasing off well-intentioned folks:

1. Legitimate criticism of the administration is offered
2. Other posters who are unable or unwilling to discern proper criticism from "Bush-bashing" swarm the person
3. The person responds in kind by further attacking what the other party holds dear (i.e. the administration)
4. This attacks validates the preconceptions in place, and the person is labeled as a "Bush basher" who should be subject to banishment

Now of course, the reverse dynamic is also in play here. But if we're going to hold those who criticize Bush accountable for inflammatory statements by banning them, it hardly seems fair to allow those who support Bush unlimited leeway in what they're allowed to post.

There are many folks here who were thoughtful posters, who are now quick to jump on their adversary because of history. PhiKapMom, who I always respected for her civility and restraint, immediately attributed the worst intentions to me on a thread a few days ago. PKM: you and I are not that far apart in our views and have been around this site a long time, yet there we were sniping at each other like teenagers. That knee-jerk reaction is a function of history rather than a reflection on our personalities.

There are also some folks here who are more interested in baiting people until they get the person kicked off. Until those people are gone, the incivility will not improve. I won't name them, but I suspect people know who they are. And they exist among both the "Pro-Bush" and "Anti-Bush" sides (I'm using those terms for lack of a better descriptor).

I admit I jumped the gun at you because I was mad at what I was reading from some others. You and I have never really had any problems until I went over the top and I freely admit that fact. I should have rewritten what I was going to post which I usually do when I am mad.

Don't have a problem with people disagreeing with a policy or statement of the President. I do have a problem when they attack him personally about his integrity or what he believes. I don't agree with him 100% on policy, but then I didn't agree with Pres Reagan 100%. I admit I do agree with Senator Inhofe more than almost any other politician I have known and fortunately he is my Senator.

BTW, I detest your senior Senator and love your junior Senator. Thought I would throw that in FWIW!

My thoughts on the whole deal are that if someone cannot defend the President and takes to name calling it is no better than the anti-Bush folks who cannot find one good thing that the President has done and calls him all kinds of names. What bothers me are the Freepers that automatically paint all Bush supporters with a broad brush that we support him 100% and don't think. I don't walk lockstep with anyone I know because I do think!

Think immigration is a major issue, not sure what the real answer is because it is way above my pay grade, but I do know that it is up to the Congress to write the law and that is where the focus should be right now. If President Bush had signed an Executive Order with his proposal, I could readily understand all the disgust, but he didn't. He proposed his ideas to Congress for them to act, but some on here that have trashed him the worst act like it is the law.

Don't think we are that far apart either. I am not asking Freepers to not disagree with a policy or what is stated, but I am asking them not to get so nasty against the President. It is so important that Kerry not become President for all the obvious reasons -- #1 being he is more liberal than Ted Kennedy and I didn't think it was possible.

As most of you know, I really don't like Alan Keyes very much after what he did here in Oklahoma during the primary in 2000 against Pres Bush, but I will guarantee you that if he were running for President against John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, or any other democRAT for that matter, he would have my vote, my support, and I would work to get him elected. EV knows what it takes for me to say that and it shows just how much I feel deep inside that a DemocRAT would do unreparable harm if elected at this time in our Nation's history.

That is how important I think it is to defeat John Kerry and make sure that an ultra liberal, anti-Vietnam war protestor does not become President.

I didn't want Bob Dole in 1996, but the other two candidates were so much worse that I held my nose and voted for him. I am asking Freepers if there is anything you agree with what Pres Bush has done as President, hold your nose and vote for him, because I would be willing to bet if you are conservative that you would disagree with John Kerry almost 100% of the time.