Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ANGRY LEFT: The Insanity of Bush Hatred
The Wall Street Journal ^ | November 14, 2007 | PETER BERKOWITZ

Posted on 11/14/2007 2:13:23 AM PST by Aristotelian

Hating the president is almost as old as the republic itself. The people, or various factions among them, have indulged in Clinton hatred, Reagan hatred, Nixon hatred, LBJ hatred, FDR hatred, Lincoln hatred, and John Adams hatred, to mention only the more extravagant hatreds that we Americans have conceived for our presidents.

But Bush hatred is different. It's not that this time members of the intellectual class have been swept away by passion and become votaries of anger and loathing. Alas, intellectuals have always been prone to employ their learning and fine words to whip up resentment and demonize the competition. Bush hatred, however, is distinguished by the pride intellectuals have taken in their hatred, openly endorsing it as a virtue and enthusiastically proclaiming that their hatred is not only a rational response to the president and his administration but a mark of good moral hygiene. . . .

Bush hatred is not a rational response to actual Bush perfidy. Rather, Bush hatred compels its progressive victims--who pride themselves on their sophistication and sensitivity to nuance--to reduce complicated events and multilayered issues to simple matters of good and evil. Like all hatred in politics, Bush hatred blinds to the other sides of the argument, and constrains the hater to see a monster instead of a political opponent. . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: angryleft; bds; bush; bushhate; bushhatred; dementalillness; hatred
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-155 next last
To: Mind-numbed Robot
You seem to suffer from the brain-blocking hatred described in this article. You are long on bluster and short on facts.

A lot of facts bother me. How can a man be Secretary of Defense for seven months and not even have a grip on actual readiness? The same man who fathered the Carter Hollow Military perhaps? Facts! Carters military was hollow when he took over as CIC now who was Ford's Sec of Defense anyway? I don't like liberals as elected leaders. I don't care what party letter they have after their name either. If you want to call it hate fine by me. I'm tired of the same names making the same mistakes. Ford the fist was Gerald R Ford. Ford the second was Poppy Bush. Ford the third is GW Bush. Understand me now?

61 posted on 11/14/2007 5:09:02 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: txzman
Plus the fact that he only “smokes” cigars and does not cheat on his wife. Liberals love creepy disgusting men.
62 posted on 11/14/2007 5:10:36 AM PST by angcat ("IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: piytar

“Was it wrong for the US to go to war with GERMANY after JAPAN attacked us at Pearl Harbor?”

Uh, didn’t we declare war on Japan, and the Germany declared war on us?


63 posted on 11/14/2007 5:11:19 AM PST by snarkybob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: snarkybob

Hillary hatred? No.

Common sense and ideological disagreement, yes.

Hillary would be a sisater for the USA, and that is a fact.


64 posted on 11/14/2007 5:11:22 AM PST by chesley (Where's the omelet? -- Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Aristotelian
This is a topic where I might not trust wikipedia. If I had the time, I’d check conservapedia. Got to go to work!
65 posted on 11/14/2007 5:11:48 AM PST by ChessExpert (Reagan dismantled the Russian empire of 21 conquered nations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: piytar
Oh BARF, not this stupidity once again. One question for you: Was it wrong for the US to go to war with GERMANY after JAPAN attacked us at Pearl Harbor? Sheesh.

When we were attacked at Pearl Harbor did we declare war on Spain? Saddam had no army as such. We owned his skies as well. Name me the Iraqi 9/11 attacker. I wasn't against removal of Saddam. But it should not have taken deploying the U.S. military for 5 years to do it. That is what we have Intel and Special Ops for. Oh I forgot Gerald R Ford said that was a No No.

66 posted on 11/14/2007 5:13:43 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: chesley

“Hillary hatred? No.
Common sense and ideological disagreement, yes.
Hillary would be a sisater for the USA, and that is a fact.”

That’s the same thing my liberal acquaintances say about GWB
So I suppose it depends on what your definition of hatred is.


67 posted on 11/14/2007 5:14:06 AM PST by snarkybob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: ChessExpert

Most certainly, Dem/lib politics is emotive, not rationally based.


68 posted on 11/14/2007 5:15:21 AM PST by Aristotelian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: chesley
Hillary would be a sisater for the USA, and that is a fact.

Hillary is a much bigger threat than her husband could have ever dreamed of but some can not grasp why that is so. It is because of the GOP. Hillary will love using all the new Executive Branch Powers the GOP congress gave Bush. The GOP is the Stupid Party. Hillary will say to the GOP congress thank you for being useful idiots to my cause.

69 posted on 11/14/2007 5:17:54 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: chesley
I agree. Hillary would be the worst thing to happen to the U.S. in my lifetime. She’s ideological, unlike Bill who was more pragmatic. Bill just wanted to be popular. He was poll-driven. He was good on free trade and even agreed to some tax cuts after the GOP took Congress. Hillary by contrast is a dyed in the wool liberal-socialist. She doesn’t trust people to make the “right” decisions, so she wants gov’t to do that for them. She’s dangerous.
70 posted on 11/14/2007 5:23:56 AM PST by Aristotelian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

“Hillary will love using all the new Executive Branch Powers the GOP congress gave Bush. “

I was disappointed that the GOP led congress passed the Patriot Act for this very reason. Of course at the time it wasn’t popular to say anything that could be construed as being anti-Bush. I did get called a lot of names, but I wonder
if the people who did the name calling still think it was a good idea, with Hillary as the frontrunner.


71 posted on 11/14/2007 5:26:22 AM PST by snarkybob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Aristotelian
First, we didn’t hate Clinton. We were disgusted by his selfish, immature antics. Second, the hatred for Pres. Bush is unprecedented.

Here’s one author’s analysis of BDS. It’s a hatred for middle America and the ‘gall’ they had to elect someone who wasn’t a 60’s style radical:

http://www.talkaboutgovernment.com/group/alt.politics.usa/messages/623416.html

72 posted on 11/14/2007 5:27:43 AM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (If Hillary is elected, her legacy will be telling the American people: Better put some ice on that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

bttt all your posts


73 posted on 11/14/2007 5:28:12 AM PST by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter...President '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Aristotelian

“It’s the media, stupid.”

(not you Aristotle)


74 posted on 11/14/2007 5:31:18 AM PST by subterfuge (HILLARY IS: She who must NOT be Dismayed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aristotelian

It’s called “group think” and their ain’t nothing intellectual about it.


75 posted on 11/14/2007 5:33:00 AM PST by Eddie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Yep, it was Texas that put him over. See: LBJ “Landslide Lyndon” and how he perfected the cemetary vote as a congressman.


76 posted on 11/14/2007 5:35:28 AM PST by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: snarkybob
I was disappointed that the GOP led congress passed the Patriot Act for this very reason. Of course at the time it wasn’t popular to say anything that could be construed as being anti-Bush. I did get called a lot of names, but I wonder if the people who did the name calling still think it was a good idea, with Hillary as the frontrunner.

Just wait till she or someone as bad picks their Head of Department of Homeland Security. This is where blind party loyalty and straight party ticket voting without consideration as to qualifications and policies are a huge disservice to the nation. No party is above tyranny nor any elected official. People dislike Bill Clinton and all he did as POTUS. Yet no one mentions Slick Willie had a GOP majority in both houses which should have as our founders intended stopped him. Being politicians rather than leaders has cost the GOP dearly in reputation and it cost them their majority status as well.

GW Bush could have been far greater than Reagan had he tried. Reagan got his agenda's past a DEM majority. Yet Bush wasted his time doing the DEMs work for them that indeed angers me. Ted Kennedy has had a dream come true. He certainly did not get all he wanted but he got far more than Reagan would have ever given him that's for sure.

If Hillary gets elected or a liberal RINO it will be because as a nation we get the government we deserve as a nation. If she is a tyrant then we have ourselves to thank for ever allowing congress to make it a possibility in the first place. We were warned for over 200 years by the founders about this.

77 posted on 11/14/2007 5:40:15 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
Understand me now?

Sure I understand you, you are very easy to understand, which causes me to repeat - you are long on heat and short on light.

Are you denying that Carter cut our military approximately in half - that it was in fact Ford who did that in his short term? Are you saying that Chaney was responsible ? If so, case closed.

78 posted on 11/14/2007 5:40:38 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
Just curious....regarding this post, and after reading your homepage...

...what do you think of Paul Weyrich now?

79 posted on 11/14/2007 5:40:45 AM PST by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter...President '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

Thanks


80 posted on 11/14/2007 5:40:59 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-155 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson