Beware: Bush hatred is a minority taste

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Democrats hate George Bush.
<snip>
The level of animosity Bush arouses in Democrats appears unprecedented. The data are not strictly comparable, but in 1998, 75 percent of Republicans said Bill Clinton made them angry. Bush?s father could arouse the ire of only 64 percent of Democrats.

Today, Bush enrages nearly 90 percent of Democrats.

This intense anger is reflected in the posture Democrats want to take vis-&agrave;-vis Republicans. While the vast majority of Republicans and independents want the two parties to work together to solve problems, Democrats do not. They are spoiling for a fight. Many Democrats feel betrayed by what they see as an accommodationist party. These Democrats do not want compromise, conciliation or cooperation. They want political war.
</snip>

Interesting take on the current political climate.:)

CkG
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
Pure Malarkey, at least the part about wanting to work with the Democrats. The spiritual guru of the neocons, Grover Norquist, defines bipartisanship as date rape, so figure it out for yourselves...
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Pure Malarkey, at least the part about wanting to work with the Democrats. The spiritual guru of the neocons, Grover Norquist, defines bipartisanship as date rape, so figure it out for yourselves...
Did you read the WHOLE article...and the whole page? There is some good stuff there(no matter what your political leanings are) - there are currently atleast 9 people who might want to take what was written seriously...but then again..maybe not:)

CkG
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Are Republicans interested in working with Democrats? Only if Democrats do what Republicans want them to do. They aren't interested in compromise. Their idea of bipartisan is GOP+ Sen. Beraux (sp?). I mean how can you talk about bi-partisanship if you don't even let the opposition time to read the bills they have to vote on.
Compromise, cooperation, and concilliation. HA.
Another thing is that it's primary time now, so candidates have to appeal to Democrat voters, not independents or Republicans. Once that's out of the way, then they can start worrying about general election.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Are Republicans interested in working with Democrats? Only if Democrats do what Republicans want them to do. They aren't interested in compromise. Their idea of bipartisan is GOP+ Sen. Beraux (sp?). I mean how can you talk about bi-partisanship if you don't even let the opposition time to read the bills they have to vote on.
Compromise, cooperation, and concilliation. HA.
Another thing is that it's primary time now, so candidates have to appeal to Democrat voters, not independents or Republicans. Once that's out of the way, then they can start worrying about general election.
Education bill? Hmm... yeah that's worked out real well. Democrats and Bush-haters are blasting Bush for it when it was truely an effort by Bush to work with them. You do remember that, don't you?

But anyway - there is more to what was written than just "bi-partisanship".

CkG
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Are Republicans interested in working with Democrats? Only if Democrats do what Republicans want them to do. They aren't interested in compromise. Their idea of bipartisan is GOP+ Sen. Beraux (sp?). I mean how can you talk about bi-partisanship if you don't even let the opposition time to read the bills they have to vote on.
Compromise, cooperation, and concilliation. HA.
Another thing is that it's primary time now, so candidates have to appeal to Democrat voters, not independents or Republicans. Once that's out of the way, then they can start worrying about general election.
Education bill? Hmm... yeah that's worked out real well. Democrats and Bush-haters are blasting Bush for it when it was truely an effort by Bush to work with them. You do remember that, don't you?

But anyway - there is more to what was written than just "bi-partisanship".

CkG
If you think Education bill worked out bad, just wait till all of Bush's other laws kick in, or more exactly when the consequences of this government spending bonanza and huge deficits really hit the fan.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
If "most Republicans" want bipartisanship, they'll get some new leadership for their party that will actually allow it
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
?? What's all this talk about bipartisanship? (R) controls boths houses and the executive and have a mandate to implement thier parties will. Have to agree with Grover Norquist on this one. You only negotaite when you HAVE to.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
Yep, Zebo, that's pretty much how the Neocons see it, too. So either the article misrepresents the wishes of "most Republicans", or their leadership is out of line. Take your pick.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Are Republicans interested in working with Democrats? Only if Democrats do what Republicans want them to do. They aren't interested in compromise. Their idea of bipartisan is GOP+ Sen. Beraux (sp?). I mean how can you talk about bi-partisanship if you don't even let the opposition time to read the bills they have to vote on.
Compromise, cooperation, and concilliation. HA.
Another thing is that it's primary time now, so candidates have to appeal to Democrat voters, not independents or Republicans. Once that's out of the way, then they can start worrying about general election.
Education bill? Hmm... yeah that's worked out real well. Democrats and Bush-haters are blasting Bush for it when it was truely an effort by Bush to work with them. You do remember that, don't you?

But anyway - there is more to what was written than just "bi-partisanship".

CkG
If you think Education bill worked out bad, just wait till all of Bush's other laws kick in, or more exactly when the consequences of this government spending bonanza and huge deficits really hit the fan.
Do you have any idea who basically wrote the Education bill?


And again -there is MUCH more to this article than just the "bipartisan" issue.

CkG
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn't Republicans hate Clinton too? IIRC, the Republican attitude was pretty vitriolic from about '94 - '00. The only thing bipartisan in Washington is the hatred.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn't Republicans hate Clinton too? IIRC, the Republican attitude was pretty vitriolic from about '94 - '00. The only thing bipartisan in Washington is the hatred.
Did you read the article?

CkG
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn't Republicans hate Clinton too? IIRC, the Republican attitude was pretty vitriolic from about '94 - '00. The only thing bipartisan in Washington is the hatred.
Did you read the article?

CkG
Yes, but frankly I'm getting tired of hearing about the "hatred" concept being pushed by the media. IMO, the media, in particular the cable news networks, are fostering a divisive, vitriolic agenda bent on polarizing Americans. Yes, there are people that do not like Bush. Yes, there are people angry with his agenda, policies, or whatever, but frankly the "hate" angle is overplayed.
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
The Democrats have been like the donkey standing between two bales of hay and starving to death because he couldn't decide which one to eat. The Republicans, like most conservatives, tend to be much more disciplined and, as a consequence have power in Congress far greater than their actual representation among the general population.

I don't expect things to change much in the next few years, but sooner or later we are going to have real coalition governments like so many other countries. Of course, some folks might say that Olympia Snow is more of a Democrat than Zell Miller, and so we actually have a coalition government already. :)

-Robert
 

ManSnake

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2000
4,749
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn't Republicans hate Clinton too? IIRC, the Republican attitude was pretty vitriolic from about '94 - '00. The only thing bipartisan in Washington is the hatred.
Did you read the article?

CkG
Nope, I didn't. But I still hate Bush!
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I almost hate to bring it up, but didn't Republicans hate Clinton too? IIRC, the Republican attitude was pretty vitriolic from about '94 - '00. The only thing bipartisan in Washington is the hatred.
Did you read the article?

CkG
Yes, but frankly I'm getting tired of hearing about the "hatred" concept being pushed by the media. IMO, the media, in particular the cable news networks, are fostering a divisive, vitriolic agenda bent on polarizing Americans. Yes, there are people that do not like Bush. Yes, there are people angry with his agenda, policies, or whatever, but frankly the "hate" angle is overplayed.
Well, if you read it, you'd have seen some supposed percentages where the author tries to show that the "hate" is somewhat worse now than before. Now again - the wording is different from previous surveys or polls or where ever he got his stats from, but I feel his overall premise rings true. One of the biggest reasons for that is because the democrats have lost all their "power"(except the courts;)) and are pretty pissed about it, but what they fail to realize is that becoming "angry" about it isn't going to help them move forward. It's the similar reasoning as to why the Republicans could never regain Congress - they bitched and moaned too much without offering ideas. Once they became the positive party they turned the tide. Now that tide has put the dems on the defensive, and the natural reaction is to lash out and whine. What really got their goat, was the Bush win in 2000 coupled with regaining control of the Congress even after the Jumpin Jim episode.
They(dems) have to figure out a way to regain their power through inclusiveness and ideas that match the will of the masses. They have for too long been the party of little groups of causes - which creates a cohesiveness problem and image problem for them. The "mainstream" american doesn't support and in some cases detest some of the groups that the dems seemingly pander to. Now the same could be said about Republicans but they don't seem to have the same quantity of "cause" groups in their corner - although they have the corporate and Religious "causes" on their side. But again - those two seem to be more "mainstream" to most americans because we ARE a religious(in some form or another) country and the great majority of Americans believe in Capitalism.

/me steps off soapbox because I'm winded:p

Anyway IMO - the "hate" is quite apparent, not only here, but in Hollyweird and the entertainment industry -which makes for "news" I guess:p
Also - I think it's becoming an issue because the candidates are continually using language which is close to, if not actually, "anger". They repeatedly have flung those types of barbs at not only Bush and the Republicans, but also Conservative personalities and the avenues which they "air";) their views. Take for example Dean. Ever notice that he has a pension for invoking Rush Limbaugh's name in the Debates? Something like "we are going to take back America from the likes of Rush Limbaugh...". Now that isn't a direct quote but it very much resembles what he has repeatedly said. Now why does he say such things? Is the intent not to rile people up and invoke a sense of "anger" or whatever sugar coated label you want to give it?

Just my take on the current state of "hateful" politics.

CkG
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY