1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

  2. Live Rockets Discussion
    Jalen Green looks like a legit star, Amen Thompson is shining and the Rockets have found something without Alperen Sengun. Clutch is talking about the 10-game winning streak at 11:00am as we talk Rockets live!

    Talking Rockets - LIVE!

Dunque Cosi: Hate, and the hating haters who hate bush

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Sep 30, 2003.

  1. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,415
    Likes Received:
    6,204
    Wonderful article in the NYTimes by David Brooks about the depths to which political discourse (this board is a shining example) has sunk:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/30/opinion/30BROO.html
    --
    September 30, 2003
    The Presidency Wars
    By DAVID BROOKS

    Have you noticed that we've moved from the age of the culture wars to the age of the presidency wars? Have you noticed that the furious arguments we used to have about cultural and social issues have been displaced by furious arguments about the current occupant of the Oval Office?

    During the 1980's, when the culture wars were going full bore, the Moral Majority clashed with the People for the American Way. Allan Bloom published "The Closing of the American Mind" and liberals and conservatives argued over the 1960's.

    Those arguments have died down, and now the best-sellers lists are dotted with screeds against the president and his supporters. A cascade of Clinton-bashing books hit the lists in the 1990's, and now in the Bush years we've got "Shrub," "Stupid White Men" and "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them."

    The culture warriors were passionate about abortion, feminism or prayer in schools. But with the presidency warrior, political disagreement, cultural resentment and personal antipathy blend to create a vitriol that is at once a descendant of the old conflicts, but also different.

    "I hate President George W. Bush," Jonathan Chait writes in a candid piece in The New Republic. "He reminds me of a certain type I knew in high school — the kid who was given a fancy sports car for his sixteenth birthday and believed that he had somehow earned it. I hate the way he walks. . . . I hate the way he talks. . . . I suspect that, if I got to know him personally, I would hate him even more."

    The quintessential new warrior scans the Web for confirmation of the president's villainy. He avoids facts that might complicate his hatred. He doesn't weigh the sins of his friends against the sins of his enemies. But about the president he will believe anything. He believes Ted Kennedy when he says the Iraq war was a fraud cooked up in Texas to benefit the Republicans politically. It feels so delicious to believe it, and even if somewhere in his mind he knows it doesn't quite square with the evidence, it's important to believe it because the other side is vicious, so he must be too.

    The fundamental argument in the presidency wars is not that the president is wrong, or is driven by a misguided ideology. That's so 1980's. The fundamental argument now is that he is illegitimate. He is so ruthless, dishonest and corrupt, he undermines the very rules of civilized society. Many conservatives believed this about Clinton. Teddy Kennedy obviously believes it about Bush. Howard Dean declares, "What's at stake in this election is democracy itself."

    The warrior goes out looking for leaders strong enough to crush the devil. Wesley Clark appeals to the warrior mentality when he declares: "This is war. It's a culture war, and I am their greatest threat. They are doing everything they can to destroy me right now." It doesn't matter that Clark doesn't yet have policies. This isn't about policies. So far the campaign has not been shaped by how much of the Bush tax cut this or that Democratic candidate wants to roll back. It's about who can stand up to the other side.

    To the warrior, politics is no longer a clash of value systems, each of which is in some way valid. It's not a competition between basically well-intentioned people who see the world differently. It's not even a conflict of interests. Instead, it's the Florida post-election fight over and over, a brutal struggle for office in which each side believes the other is behaving despicably. The culture wars produced some intellectually serious books because there were principles involved. The presidency wars produce mostly terrible ones because the hatreds have left the animating ideas far behind and now romp about on their own.

    The warriors have one other feature: ignorance. They have as much firsthand knowledge of their enemies as members of the K.K.K. had of the N.A.A.C.P. In fact, most people in the last two administrations were well-intentioned patriots doing the best they could. The core threat to democracy is not in the White House, it's the haters themselves.

    And for those who are going to make the obvious point: Yes, I did say some of these things during the Clinton years, when it was conservatives bashing a Democrat, but not loudly enough, which I regret, because the weeds that were once on the edge of public life now threaten to choke off the whole thing.
     
  2. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    34,618
    Likes Received:
    33,558
    Most of the arguments on this BBS do indeed address misguided ideology, actually. Even though people get testy (and even insulting) here at CC in the D&D, I believe we're a cut above what you see in the typical media talk shows, and probably a cut above even the typical news programming.

    But anyway, basso, I agree with the point of the article. That said, he could easily have spent a lot more ink on how bad the rhetoric got for Clinton. It was just as bad (if not worse) than the rhetoric we're hearing now.

    PS -- love your sig.
     
  3. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,271
    Likes Received:
    8,067
    And for those who are going to make the obvious point: Yes, I did say some of these things during the Clinton years, when it was conservatives bashing a Democrat, but not loudly enough, which I regret, because the weeds that were once on the edge of public life now threaten to choke off the whole thing.

    I can agree with the last phrase and while I recognize there are dangers in this, it would be foolish (and a disservice to the country) for Dems to unilaterally disarm.
     
  4. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    84,927
    Likes Received:
    83,114
    Was about to post this myself, excellent article. It pretty much sums up the pathetic state of issue-oriented discourse in America over the past 10 years or so. People often harp on problems without providing any sort of alternative, merely thinking from the negative.

    Personally, I find myself less & less interested in national politics each day, and this has been the case since Clinton's second term. The tone & timbre of much of what passes for commentary is just too unpalpable for me.
     
  5. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    and a backhanded admission that he and his buddies were the ones who helped sink it.

    He made the rules. Now George has to play by them. Petty? probably, but too bad. Tom DeLay doesn't play by them, nor does Ken Starr or Darrell Issa or anybody else.

    When the fate of the country is at stake, too bad. Republicans invented and perfected scandal politics and attaack ads (Willie Horton, all the ridiculous clinton "scandals", the Arkansas Project), and still use them. So now we should back off? F that.
     
  6. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,415
    Likes Received:
    6,204
    Exhibit A...
     
  7. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    34,618
    Likes Received:
    33,558
    Okay, it's exhibit A, but what do you suggest, basso?

    Not only did democrats suffer through 8 years of this ridiculous, hurtful and hyperbolic rhetoric, now many of us feel that the stakes are much higher with the international policies of this administration.

    So, we're supposed to be the Ghandi-esque ones who play nice first? I really agree with Sam that Democrats did not exactly invent the current modus operandi.

    Really, what do you suggest? Letting Tom Delay, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft go unchecked?
     
    #7 B-Bob, Sep 30, 2003
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2003
  8. BlastOff

    BlastOff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    1,771
    Likes Received:
    87
    Republicans whining about attacks? Oh the irony...
     
  9. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    OK, so which personal scandal should we let up on? The one that the CIA asked the DOJ to investigate?

    Or, uh, the independent counsel investigation into George Bush's personal life? Oh wait,, I forgot, there isn't one.

    Maybe the Texas project! You know, the multimillion dollar effort that Ted Turner is financing to dig up dirt on W. Oh wait, there isn't one either.

    Maybe Wesley Clark should stop running that ad that says that George Bush furloughed evil scarly looking black murderers?

    Or, maybe we should shut down the web pages that say the Bush had Vince Foster killed and his wife is a lesbian?
    Oh, wait, once agian, there aren't any.

    Help me out Basso, which scandal should I tell the DNC to pull the plug on?

    :confused:
     
  10. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    84,927
    Likes Received:
    83,114
    "Scandal politics" has been around as long as politics itself; the behavior of much of the gop during Clinton's admin was absolutely disguisting, and many, many conservatives & independents realize this, and said so at the time.

    But hey, who cares what's good for the country, right? Like you said, **** that, it's payback time, beyotch.

    Wonderful attitude.
     
  11. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182

    I propose the same question to you that I propose to Basso?

    Which politically motivated attack/scandal mongering effort should be shut down by the DNC?

    You tell me.

    I'm waiting.

    And should this be reciprocal, do you suppose that the hatchet jobs on Wesley Clark would stop otherwise?
     
  12. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,710
    Likes Received:
    2,969
    Sounds like the Republicans want to take their ball home, too bad it isn't their ball.

    Honestly, while the guy has a point, most people who attack George Bush attack his ideology. They don't believe in his economic policy, or his foreign policy. Last time I checked, those were differences in ideology.

    As far as the WMD so called scandal, why shouldn't we question the evidence Bush presented in support for the war. This is America isn't it?
     
  13. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,415
    Likes Received:
    6,204
    If your point is that republicans mercilessly dogged the clinton administration, then yes, score one for you. however, your response makes brooks' point. democrats are engaged in nothing more than payback for 1992-2000. and not to put too fine a point on it, but it's worth remembering that there was some there there...
     
  14. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    56,793
    Likes Received:
    39,077
    Well, you fit right in with average Texans these days, who have little interest in state politics.

    This whole, "I just don't have much interest in (fill in the blank... local, state, federal) politics these days because it's all so distasteful... and what difference does it make anyway?" is one of the biggest problems we have in this country.

    We have an ever-decreasing percentage of registered voters, in the main, and an ever decreasing number of them who bother to vote. Which leads us to politicians being elected by smaller and smaller percentages of Americans. And this is healthy?

    Not to pick on you, Buck... you just brought it to mind, but if people take so little interest in the political process, they shouldn't be surprised when they take their head out of the sand one day, look around, and wonder, "What the hell happened to my country??"
     
  15. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    116
    It's worth remembering that there is some here here as well.

    All you have to do is take a good hard look at it.
     
  16. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    And my point is that the current scandals are absolutely different in kind and nature and frequency.

    The president's policies in Iraq and on the budget are valid subject of discussion. The fact that the federal government is 500billion in the hole since GWB decided to give 200 to the rich may be "scandalous", but its not scandal politics. It's a valid subject of public policy.

    As is the subject that Cheney was (and is) lying his ass off about Iraq and Al qaeda, and that the admin used dubious data to get us in, whether through chicanery, incompetence, or just bad luck, it's a valid topic.

    The Rose Law firm billing records are not.

    That's why I want you to give comparable examples.

    I'll even give you one: George Bush's sh-tty service record during wartime. Now, there's a case to be made that he opens himself up for it by prancing around in a flight suit, but it's not really that relevant today, even though he likes to run around starting wars.

    But refresh my memory as to how many books have been written about it?
     
    #16 SamFisher, Sep 30, 2003
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2003
  17. Rocketman95

    Rocketman95 Hangout Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    48,946
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Why can't we liberals be more like those fair minded people like Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Bob Barr, or Bill O'Reilly? They're so nice and we're just haters.

    Insert the biggest rolling eyes ever.
     
  18. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,710
    Likes Received:
    2,969
    Exactly SamFisher,

    Comparing the WMD evidence to WhiteWater is not a good comparison. I'm not saying that WhiteWater should've or should not have been investigated, but one has a direct bearing on the country in present day, and one is just to bring up dirt.
     
  19. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,415
    Likes Received:
    6,204
    To which scandals do you refer? Whether or not WMDs are ever found in Iraq is ultimately beside the point. The onus was on saddam to demonstrate he didn't have them. and in any case, the mass graves of iraqi citizens make the moral case for this war far more eloquently than any tired discussion of whether iraq had WMDs. you can argue the latter point (but being wrong isn't "scandalous"), but the former is irrefutable.

    as to the tax cuts, you can certainly debate their efficacy, but they hardly rise to the level of scandal- and remember, they were enacted by congress, not by executive fiat. i do think the failure to enact comparable spending cuts is the bush administrations, and congress', most egregious failure. once again tho, it's hardly a "scandal..."
     
  20. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,415
    Likes Received:
    6,204
    balance is what's required for any intelligent, meaningful discussion of politics and public policy. i can cite plenty of examples of policies where i differ w/ this administration. can any of you haters cite even one instance where you agree w/ GWB?
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now