Talkin' W

[skypigeon]

This is something a recent Time Magazine brought up, and it seems like a perfect subject for this board.

What exactly is it about George W. Bush that brings out people's passions so much--for or against?

Not his policies, now; not his stands on issues, not what he's done, not what he hasn't done. We're hashing that out on other threads. What is it about him, specifically, that makes you feel the way you do?

I got to thinking about this when another poster put up the link to the Snopes site about GWB's surprise Thanksgiving visit to the troops. The one that says, from all accounts, the men were genuinely honored to have him there.

Yet read this week's Doonesbury on your comic pages, and get the impression that he came across as no less than a modern-day Claudius or Caligula, and the troops really resented him being there.

Why the extremes? Why such apparent hatred for the man himself?

[Ren Butler]

It could just be that we are becoming more and more polarized.

Clinton was probably hated by more righties than any other Dem.

GWB is probably hated by more lefties than any other Republican.

Long gone are the days of "he's our president, so we should support him."

With access to media like never before (internet, 24-hour cable news), there is no excuse for not having your own opinions. So everybody is an "expert," and either you like what Bush is doing, you hate what Bush is doing, or you don't care.

Those who hate Bush are probably afraid of his ability to connect with the common man, his straight shooting, his aggressiveness.

Of course, some on the left are going to hate ANYBODY on the right. And vice versa.

[mds24]

Re: Talkin' W

Originally posted by skypigeon

Yet read this week's Doonesbury on your comic pages, and get the impression that he came across as no less than a modern-day Claudius or Caligula, and the troops really resented him being there.

Why the extremes? Why such apparent hatred for the man himself?

I have missed Doonesbury so not sure about this, is there any evidence for that claim?

I watched C-SPAN the next morning and an individual from Louisiana called and claimed not to be a Bush supporter but said his son was in that room when Bush arrived and from his discription his son was pretty excited about seeing the President and getting a picture taken with the President. He said his son had e-mailed him the picture and then called (by that time it was in the middle of the night in the US) to tell him. The moderator from C-SPAN held up a number of the news photos from the event to see if the man could see his son in any of those photos.

As far as the remainder of your post I believe at this point the "hate" for the president has become a sad fact of life. There are a lot of Republicans I have heard claim that Watergate was just "getcha" by Democrats against Nixon.

I recall a lot of hate toward Reagan (and I was a Democrat back then )

I recall watching C-SPAN the day of Clinton's inauguration in 1993 and there was a lot of hatred toward him at that point and he hadn't even taken office yet. Actually I recall while listening to that saying to somebody that from that tone someone is going to try to kill him.

At this point, whoever is elected president can expect for a small fringe from the opposing side to start calling for impeachment even before he takes office.

I have been in a position to deal one-on-one with W when he was running for Governor of Texas and as Governor.

I also covered politics and was news editor for a Texas newspaper where I had regular dealings with one of the top Democrats in the Texas House and Texas Senate and know how they spoke of their dealings with Bush as Governor.

One thing that impressed both of them was that after Bush was elected Governor they both said that Bush talked to some of the Dems in the Texas House and Senate and told them that he would not actively campaign in their districts against those Democrats he felt supported most of his "agenda" during the Texas Legislature.

Although it was an "unwritten" agreement that both said Bush could have broken and there was nothing they could do about it - heck they expected him to campaign for their opponents anyway - he never did. Their R opponents had to go to Austin to get campaign photos with a popular R governor.

While some try to claim he has not tried to work with Democrats I know from first hand experience he has.

Where we are at this point I don't believe there is anything Bush could do that would have kept an amount of this "hate" against him, same as Clinton.

[JBaiza]

Re: Talkin' W

Originally posted by skypigeon
Yet read this week's Doonesbury on your comic pages, and get the impression that he came across as no less than a modern-day Claudius or Caligula, and the troops really resented him being there.

My wife emailed me this, it's an email circulating around so it's validity is questionable at best .... but I was reminded of it when I read this post .... so .... for what it's worth:

An Email from a Captain in Iraq

We knew there was a dinner planned with ambassador Bremer and LTG Sanchez. There were 600 seats available and all the units in the division were tasked with filling a few tables. Naturally, the 501st MI battalion got our table. Soldiers were grumbling about having to sit through another dog-and-pony show, so we had to pick soldiers to attend. I chose not to go.

But, about 1500 the G2, LTC Devan, came up to me and with a smile, asked me to come to dinner with him, to meet him in his office at 1600 and bring a camera. I didn't really care about getting a picture with Sanchez or Bremer, but when the division's senior intelligence officer asks you to go, you go. We were seated in the chow hall, fully decorated for Thanksgiving when all kinds of secret service guys showed up.

That was my first clue, because Bremer's been here before and his personal security detachment is not that big. Then BG Dempsey got up to speak, and he welcomed ambassador Bremer and LTG Sanchez. Bremer thanked us all and pulled out a piece of paper as if to give a speech. He mentioned that the President had given him this Thanksgiving speech to give to the troops. He then paused and said that the senior man present should be the one to give it. He then looked at Sanchez, who just smiled.

Bremer then said that we should probably get someone more senior to read the speech. Then, from behind the camouflage netting, the President of the United States came around. The mess hall actually erupted with hollering. Troops bounded to their feet with shocked smiles and just began cheering with all their hearts. The building actually shook. It was just unreal. I was absolutely stunned. Not only for the obvious, but also because I was only two tables away from the podium. There he stood, less than thirty feet away from me! The cheering went on and on and on.

Soldiers were hollering, cheering, and a lot of them were crying. There was not a dry eye at my table. When he stepped up to the cheering, I could clearly see tears running down his cheeks. It was the most surreal moment I've had in years. Not since my wedding and Aaron being born. Here was this man, our President, came all the way around the world, spending 17 hours on an airplane and landing in the most dangerous airport in the world, where a plane was shot out of the sky not six days before.

Just to spend two hours with his troops. Only to get on a plane and spend another 17 hours flying back. It was a great moment, and I will never forget it. He delivered his speech, which we all loved, when he looked right at me and held his eyes on me. Then he stepped down and was just mobbed by the soldiers. He slowly worked his way all the way around the chow hall and shook every last hand extended. Every soldier who wanted a photo with the President got one. I made my way through the line, got dinner, then wolfed it down as he was still working the room.

You could tell he was really enjoying himself. It wasn't just a photo opportunity. This man was actually enjoying himself! He worked his way over the course of about 90 minutes towards my side of the room. Meanwhile, I took the opportunity to shake a few hands. I got a picture with Ambassador Bremer, Talabani (acting Iraqi president) and Achmed Chalabi (another member of the ruling council) and Condaleeza Rice, who was there with him.

I felt like I was drunk. He was getting closer to my table so I went back over to my seat. As he passed and posed for photos, he looked my in the eye and "How you doin', captain." I smiled and said "God bless you, sir." To which he responded "I'm proud of what you do, captain." Then moved on.

[Ren Butler]

Re: Re: Talkin' W

Originally posted by JBaiza
My wife emailed me this, it's an email circulating around so it's validity is questionable at best ...

This story has been validated at this web site.

[skypigeon]

This link will take you to the latest strip of Doonesbury. There's a link on the page that takes you to a library of sorts.

Trudeau doesn't call Bush "Claudius" or "Caligula," that's me taking poetic license. But still, look at the headgear...

[BlueStang]

I don't think it was President Bill Clinton that a lot of us didn't like then... it was the Presidents Clinton (or the idea of plurality). During those first two years, it was not things that Bill said that got folks angry. The person saying those things got "stiffled" after the Republicans won the House, but we still knew that she was there.

[Jimbo77]

Originally posted by Ren Butler
It could just be that we are becoming more and more polarized.

Clinton was probably hated by more righties than any other Dem.

GWB is probably hated by more lefties than any other Republican.

Long gone are the days of "he's our president, so we should support him."

Clinton did some good things while he was president. Some. I didn't hate him. I couldn't stand his politics, though. As for GWB. I could care less if they can't stand him. The people using the hate rallies against him are lost anyways. What I can't stand is when these organizations try to get everyone to hate Bush. Just a huge annoyance. Trying to force people to believe what they believe. What a crock of
#@!*.

[Frank Capua]

One reason people don't like Bush is all the lies... "leave no kid behind" that leaves plenty behind when he refuses to fund it. Or now talking about those countries who didn't join us in the "liberation" of Iraq when that wasn't what we were telling them we wanted to invade Iraq for. We were telling Russia... France and the rest of the world at the U.N. that Iraq was a danger to all of us because he "knew" they had WMDs.

Or claiming he was a uniter not a divider when he has led us into a national mood that is far more divisive than what we saw under Reagan, Bush 1 or Clinton... even the Clintons if you wish.

And what the Republicans are doing now to the primaries...

It seems that several states with Republican-dominated legislatures have now canceled their scheduled 2004 presidential primaries, and several others have tried to but had their efforts stymied by vetoes from Democratic governors.

This move is ostensibly to save the states the expense, but that reason carries about as much water as Bush's stated reasons to attack Iraq (WMDs? Al-Qa'eda? The warm welcome we'll receive?)

The real reason is to deny the Democratic candidates a platform for their campaign rhetoric. It is another effort to control the political landscape in a way that only Bush's lying message can get across to the public.

Kansas, Colorado and Utah, their governments dominated by Republicans, have already cancelled their scheduled 2004 primaries. The Republican-controlled legislatures in Arizona and Missouri passed similar laws that were vetoed by their Democratic governors.

Please note that I personally am no big fan of presidential primaries. I do not think that they result in choosing a qualified, electable nominee as effectively as party caucuses, which tend to draw the knowledgeable as the poorly informed opt not to participate. I am particularly annoyed with OPEN primaries in which one need not even be registered as a party member to participate. This permits those who do not wish a party well to influence the nominating process, and I feel that this is very unhealthy. South Carolina is the most important early primary that is "open" in this way.

But one thing that primaries definitely accomplish is to increase the publicity for candidates, and this is what those Republican legislatures are trying to curtail. They want Bush to control ALL the news cycles, and they don't care what they need to destroy to accomplish that goal.

Here's an AP story about it in one of my favorite newspapers, the Charleston (WV) Gazette:

http://www.wvgazette.com/section/APNews/News/ap0584n

Recalls, redistricting, gerrymandering, cancellation of primaries, miscounting our votes -- where will it stop? We are rapidly declining into a feudal society where We the People have no say whatsoever in our governance, and we have the Bush League and the Republican Party to thank for it.

[JBaiza]

Re: Re: Re: Talkin' W

Originally posted by Ren Butler
This story has been validated at this web site.

Thanks Ren.

[skypigeon]

Originally posted by Whosyer-Sparkplug. snipped for point:
And what the Republicans are doing now to the primaries...

It seems that several states with Republican-dominated legislatures have now canceled their scheduled 2004 presidential primaries, and several others have tried to but had their efforts stymied by vetoes from Democratic governors.

This move is ostensibly to save the states the expense, but that reason carries about as much water as Bush's stated reasons to attack Iraq (WMDs? Al-Qa'eda? The warm welcome we'll receive?)

The real reason is to deny the Democratic candidates a platform for their campaign rhetoric. It is another effort to control the political landscape in a way that only Bush's lying message can get across to the public.

Kansas, Colorado and Utah, their governments dominated by Republicans, have already cancelled their scheduled 2004 primaries. The Republican-controlled legislatures in Arizona and Missouri passed similar laws that were vetoed by their Democratic governors....

Recalls, redistricting, gerrymandering, cancellation of primaries, miscounting our votes -- where will it stop? We are rapidly declining into a feudal society where We the People have no say whatsoever in our governance, and we have the Bush League and the Republican Party to thank for it.

I can only speak for Kansas, Whosyer, but... you're full of it. Our primary is so late in the year that, by the time it happens, the nominee is already cut-and-dried. The state killed our '00 primary for that reason, and I believe it's the same reason the '04 one is gone.

And our governor, Kathleen Sebelius, is a Democrat; and I've yet to hear anything about her vetoing any attempt to get rid of a primary with only one candidate.

[Frank Capua]

Originally posted by skypigeon
I can only speak for Kansas, Whosyer, but... you're full of it. Our primary is so late in the year that, by the time it happens, the nominee is already cut-and-dried. The state killed our '00 primary for that reason, and I believe it's the same reason the '04 one is gone.

And our governor, Kathleen Sebelius, is a Democrat; and I've yet to hear anything about her vetoing any attempt to get rid of a primary with only one candidate.

How am I full of it if Kansas legislature dominated by Republicans did cancell their primary? Just because this Democratic Govenor didn't veto doesn't disagree with anything I said. I also noted that most states were using the cost line. Maybe there were enough Republicans in Kansas to make a veto meaningless... or maybe like Washington state the democrats have decided to go with a caucus instead of a primary and cancelled theirs since the Republicans only have one canididate.

Also if Kansas is worried about their primary being so late they could move it. You think late primaries are only problematic this year and not years in the past?

No they say it's the cost but don't be naive.

[Jimbo77]

Originally posted by Whosyer-Sparkplug
One reason people don't like Bush is all the lies... "leave no kid behind" that leaves plenty behind when he refuses to fund it. Or now talking about those countries who didn't join us in the "liberation" of Iraq when that wasn't what we were telling them we wanted to invade Iraq for. We were telling Russia... France and the rest of the world at the U.N. that Iraq was a danger to all of us because he "knew" they had WMDs.

Kansas, Colorado and Utah, their governments dominated by Republicans, have already cancelled their scheduled 2004 primaries. The Republican-controlled legislatures in Arizona and Missouri passed similar laws that were vetoed by their Democratic governors.

I see protesters, radicals, interest groups, and ineffective senators accusing the president of lying. I see the majority of Americans getting behind the president on the war in Iraq. I see disillusioned dems crying foul on the Repub control, when in reality their senators and congressman continue to prove their incompetence and gridlock in Congress. The people that go out to vote are not all republican voters. They are registered Independents, Democrats, and Republicans, and they see the substandard jobs that the democrat senators, governors, and congress men and women continue to do. And they wonder why they've lost control of major political seats in this country...

As for Governor Napolitano of Arizona? Yes, she has vetoed that measure. However, there's already a recall mounting to have her ousted. Frankly, I really don't care one way or the other. I see too many democrat state politicians in Arizona continue to crossover to become republicans, because they go where the grass grows greener. Bottomline, too many democrats are disguised as republicans in Arizona.

[Doctorindy]

Originally posted by Whosyer-Sparkplug

Recalls

It was led by a Rep., but it passed in a landslide vote. Reps. and Dems.

redistricting

Most if not all states are required by law to make adjustments to their districts following the results of the census. It couldn't happen in time for the '02 election, but will be for '04. Some states lose House members, some gain. It's a fact of life, not a Republican thing.

gerrymandering

Been going on for years, except only now that the Democrats are not in charge of it, they are whining about it. Have you ever seen what a congressional district lookes like in an urban area? It looks like a Picaso painting on drugs. From what I've read, the two parties will both benefit from a lot of the redrawing this time around because it's creating solid Republican districts and solid Democrat districts. It's creating situations were there is going to be less split districts, and a bit less flip-flop districts.

cancellation of primaries

? I think Kansas posted up there that that's bunk. Perhaps for the Repbulican ticket it makes little sense to have aprimary unless you are putting another issue on the ballot. Only one name on the ballot is a waste of "precious taxpayer money" I thought

miscounting our votes

Wonder how those overseas military absentee voters feel?

Last time I checked, all the buffoonery took place in Democratic districts run by Democrats, trying to figure out how they can get Democrats to win. Also heard that the Miriam Oliphant, the Democrat supervisor of elections in Broward County was fired because she continued to be the most corrupt and incompetent director in the state, even in the '02 elections. Is it any coincidence that all the problems occurred in those areas? IMHO, I don't think so.

[Taxpayer]

Re: Talkin' W

Originally posted by skypigeon
This is something a recent Time Magazine brought up, and it seems like a perfect subject for this board.

What exactly is it about George W. Bush that brings out people's passions so much--for or against?

Not his policies, now; not his stands on issues, not what he's done, not what he hasn't done. We're hashing that out on other threads. What is it about him, specifically, that makes you feel the way you do?

I'd forgotten I had received this e-mail attachment two months ago. I assume it is one individual's (Mr. Goodolddog?) answer to why be an advocate and have passion for.

Cowboy