From the Boston Globe (via Sarah):
A POPULAR conceit of the left is that political hatred is a sickness of the right, one to which liberals are largely immune. "Just who are these Clinton haters," asked Time magazine in April 1994, "and why do they loathe Bill and Hillary with such passion?" It answered, in effect: That's just the way conservatives are. The article quoted historian Alan Brinkley: "Liberals tend to value tolerance highly, so there's a greater reluctance to destroy enemies than among the right."That was a whopper even in 1994, a year when Republican leader Newt Gingrich was routinely vilified as a McCarthyite and a racist. Ten years later, with a storm of Bush hatred raging among liberal Democrats, the notion that the left is too high-minded to savage its opponents is about as plausible as the claim that the moon landings were staged in Hollywood.
The reason they hate Bush so much is that he is a genuine challenge to their ideology, unlike his father (who by the way lost his bid for re-election).
Posted by David Boxenhorn at July 26, 2004 02:45 PMDavid, actually, the amusing (or sad, depending on your point of view) thing is that GWB has been far more successful at pushing through the liberal agenda than Clinton would have dreamed possible. Yes, I'll grant that he passed several tax cuts (which are in fact a pittance compared to the overall tax burden), and he's been marginally better in his response to 9/11 than Gore probably would have been. But...he still avoids mentioning the real enemy of America (hint: "terror" is a tactic, the enemy is Islam), not one head ever rolled as a result of 9/11, Israel is still treated in a patronizing and demeaning manner, and then there is the prescription drug benefit, campaign finance "reform", Patriot Act (originally written under Janet Reno's watch), massive increase in farm subsidies, No Child Left Behind...the list goes on and on. And don't forget, Bush is responsible for the greatest increase in federal spending then any president since LBJ, no small achievment.
He is NO challenge to their ideology AT ALL. They simply hate him for the "R" after his name. Actually the best description I've ever read of the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the former are International Socialists, while the latter are Corporate Socialists.
There are differences between the two parties, but they are basically about how fast they want to drive off a cliff - the Dems want to go 80, while the Reps want to slow down to 65. But going off a cliff is going off a cliff, regardless of how fast you drive.
I voted (happily and enthusiastically) for him in 2000. Were I to vote this November (which I'm not, for other reasons), I'd cast my ballot for Badnarik (Libertarian) or Peroutka (Constitution).
Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2004 11:16 PM Permalink