Why so poisonous?

[CARLHAYDEN]

I've been asking myself for sometime why the Bush haters are so poisonous?

After listening to many of them, two salient points seem to apply.

First, the Bush haters are enraged that he has been so sucessful.

While the liberals could sucessfully cower Bush sr., Furd, and Nixon, they have been unable to cower Reagan or Bush Jr.

They tried to explain away Reagan's sucesses by calling him the 'great communicator.'  Cann't exactly say that about GW, who admits that his wife speaks better english than he does.

Second,  the remnants of liberal power in the federal government are primarily in the judiciary.  If Bush gets reelected, he's not going to appoint liberal judges.

The clock is ticking on many of the liberal judges on the federal court.  The grim reaper will soon be removing many of them.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I think that the opposite seems true for Kerry supporters. As I've said, it's all a matter of perspective. And from my perspective, the last line of your post is a tad tasteless.

First, poll after poll has indicated that Kerry supporters are in fact Bush opponents and just supporting Kerry because he's the Democrat and to the left of Bush.

Even the SUSA polls show this in most states!

Second, when I post something disagreeing with Kerry, I am generally quite specific, often citing a source (I have cited his voting record, I have cited specific statements he has made).  Kerry supporters generally make evaluative general statements without citing specifics (they alledge he's stupid, lying, etc.)

Third, Bush supporters can generally cite at least one (often more) examples of where they disagree with Bush policies.  I have (to cite one example) disagree with Bush's immigration polcies (whick comes close to amnesty).  Kerry supporters are loathe to disagree (publicly) with Kerry on any specific item.

Fourth, there are numerous examples of Bush headquarters over the past month being invade, burgled, shot at, etc.  So far, I have only heard of one allegations of a Kerry headquarters being subject to this source of attack.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Let me cite a couple of other examples.

First an organization called something like 'Jews for Kerry' had a web posting in which one of their characters attacked and beheaded Vice-President Cheney.

Second, a Tennesse organization supporting Kerry has a web site where they posted the message that (working from memory) 'Voting for Bush is like winning a race in the special olympics, even if you win you're still retarded).

While I agree that some Bush supporters have cross the line of decency, they have been chastised for their actions.

Also, can you cite similiar examples by Bush supporters?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Also, can you cite similiar examples by Bush supporters?

Read, like, half of the posts by "shankbear".

"maybe it is the vacuum you live in, you sound like a democrat"

"Kerry was the gut and cut senator.  His LIB record proves it."

"LIBS....stealing what they can't win."

"seems you just like to spew the LIB line.  That will get you nowhere Don."

"Florida is not a toss-up unless it is stolen by rampant DEM voter fraud."

"So a media outlet decides that it wants to allow the presentation of another point of view.  LET THE WHINEFEST begin from the left."

"LIBERAL....if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....it's probably a duck."

"Voter fraud by the DEMS may make or break Florida."

"Life has demonstrated that the LIBERAL ideology is a failure."

"Look out....Zogby's on the loose.  LIBS can cut way back on the valium."

I think you get the idea.

Apparently YOU did not get my point!

Its one thing to dispargingly refer to the other side.

Its quite another thing to call those who disagree liars, retarded or threaten violence.

See the difference?

[CARLHAYDEN]

As to the original question "Why are Bush haters so poisonous?" my answer is this:

"Wizard's Third Rule: Passion Rules Reason" - Terry Goodkind.

Quite simply, these people, along with other groups, have become so angry at something, or so obsessed with something, that it virtually consumes them. They become passionate about their hate, and because of that they lose the clear head required to reason and think things out objectively, and they become easily manipulated, because they want to hear bad things about Bush(or whatever their particular beef is). If they hear "Bush killed a puppy" they would believe it simply because they want to believe it - the won't care if it's true or not. Of course, the same goes for positives - become too obsessed with helping or liking something, and you will believe anything good you hear about it.

While there is much in what you have to say, my question would be why the extreme hatred for GW, as opposed to the contempt for either Furd or Bush pere?

[CARLHAYDEN]

As to the original question "Why are Bush haters so poisonous?" my answer is this:

"Wizard's Third Rule: Passion Rules Reason" - Terry Goodkind.

Quite simply, these people, along with other groups, have become so angry at something, or so obsessed with something, that it virtually consumes them. They become passionate about their hate, and because of that they lose the clear head required to reason and think things out objectively, and they become easily manipulated, because they want to hear bad things about Bush(or whatever their particular beef is). If they hear "Bush killed a puppy" they would believe it simply because they want to believe it - the won't care if it's true or not. Of course, the same goes for positives - become too obsessed with helping or liking something, and you will believe anything good you hear about it.

While there is much in what you have to say, my question would be why the extreme hatred for GW, as opposed to the contempt for either Furd or Bush pere?

Because they were merely so-so Presidents, not first rate mitigated disasters.

You begin to prove my point.

Unemployment under both Furd and Bush the elder was higher than under GW, both presided over a collapse of their party, both had challenges for renomination, both betrayed their base and both were losers.

Bush's conviction and strenght (and effectiveness) really rankles liberals.