The difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals hope for the best and work to achieve it while conservatives hope for disasters so they can say "I told you so."
When Bush the Younger took office eight years ago I was upset at what I considered Grand Theft Presidency and bore him nothing but ill will. I wanted Congress to block the worst of his excesses but I never wanted to nation to suffer through the horrors that a failed presidency brings. I did not want the Iraq War and fought against it because I knew it would fail and the nation would suffer for its failure. I did not want deregulation of the banking and investing industries because I knew the excess that followed would injure us all. I did not sit back watching Hurricane Katrina with the giddy hope that Bush would fail to respond well and one of the nation's great cities would be destroyed. But, that's me.
Republicans are a different breed. If they can't rule the country they want disaster to follow. Rush Limbaugh and this most popular RedState poster want failure. They fear a successful liberal more than they fear recession, depression, pestilence, and war. They would prefer the United States brought to its knees and lower than to see a liberal Democrat be successful. They are not considering working through the political system to achieve their vision of success. No, they want utter failure and the worse the better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Grand Theft presidency? What did Barak Obama just do? The man was not born in the US, he went to Muslim school as a child. He was a senator 142 days when he threw his hat into the ring. Had never held another office. If you went to work for ANY corporation, wouldn't it take you a little longer to work your way to the top?
He lied his way to the top and you believed him! What excesses? You blame Katrina on Bush, he is not even a weather man. The fiasco that is Katrina lays right at Ray Nagin's feet, who refused help several times till things were out of anyone's control, so Bush gets blamed for that.
Have you ever shopped around for better prices? Then you must like paying more than necessary for things or you would think deregulation was a good thing. If you would check it out, Barney Frank was having a homosexual affair with one of the higher ups at Fannie Mae and pushed a bill thru the Senate that ultimately brought down those mortgage companys. It was Clinton's administration that set us up for the financial failure. Read up on it! How do you consider that Iraq is a failure? Didn't we get get rid of a tyrant? Didn't he kill his own people, millions of them?
Forgot that didn't you? Bet you forgot Sept 11 to didn't you? 3000 of our people died that day, because Bill Clinton didn't do anything when the terrorists bombed us at several overseas locations. Cause he's a liberal. Weak and whiny, afraid of confrontation.
George W. Bush is an honoralble man, and I am proud that he was our president.
Whew! It's amazing how easy it is for some people to hate. Are these angry commentors big "C" or little "c" Christians.
Ha! I'm just listening to Talk of The Nation, which I suppose will get me labeled as a "*@&^!" liberal, or whatever the current flame word is. But, I had to laugh when the caller said, "I don't hear a lot of "right-wing" people hating Obama.
Oops. Wrong. Here are two haters.
It's not hatred, necessarily (though there may be some) it sound like a panicked fear. Someone has been convincing them that they need to be afraid.
They need to stop listening to fear mongers, look at reality and make their own decisions. Learn to think for themselves.
It's really kind of disgusting that people like Rush L. can make a fat, big dollar, living stirring up hate & discontent by feeding on the fears and uncertainty of folks like this. Disgusting and sad.
You have said much more hateful things than I, if I said anything hateful, I don't see it!
George Bush kept you butts safe for the last 8 years, whether you think so or not. If Clinton had taken care of the terrorists, Osama Bin Laden and his group, then Sept 11 would never have happened.
You don't get us at all, KE.
But we're doing a lousy job of splainin'.
There are at several kinds of "success" being talked about here.
There is the success at getting promises implemented: ending the war in Iraq, capturing Bin Laden, passing universal health insurance. The mere act of getting these things done can be called "success". Some of these things we like, and we are not even in complete agreement on whether these things are good or bad. Everyone wants the war in Iraq to be over, for instance; the timing is the question.
There is also the success of those policies once they are implemented: will Iraq descend into anarchy or jihad? Will Bin Laden be captured alive, and put on U.S. criminal trial, or will he be killed? Will universal health care be run like the DMV, with rationing and so on?
Then there is the success of Obama himself in remaining as popular as he is, getting credit or escaping blame for the consequences of his policies.
We don't want Obama's expansion of government to be implemented, because we know that there will be side effects to the changes he wants, whether it's government growth, closing Gitmo, or ending the war in Iraq, that we can't know specifically ahead of time.
We also already know that most of his policies won't succeed at their purported aims. His fiscal stimulus, for instance, is an expensive sham, designed to give Congressional Democrats political credit for pork projects ahead of 2010.
We just don't like the direction he's taking the country. We want people to succeed, not the government, and to the extent that the government does things for them people will not do them on their own.
Post a Comment