RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At?

RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 7:47:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shannie quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda Well, I don't know. Yes, on the one hand, there is anger enough to go around on both sides, but on the other hand, I think the OP asks a legitimate question. The anger I'm seeing from the right seems to go way beyond rational explanation, and I'm genuinely curious to hear explanations from the conservatives about exactly where the root of it is. What have they got to be so pissed about? I don't agree with everything the guy's doing, but for the most part he seems to be making a sincere effort to fix some of the critical problems that were either ignored, exacerbated, or just plain created by the previous administration. I'd love to hear someone try to explain what rational reason they have for hating the man so much. In that case, a good question might also be, "Why aren't people who call themselves 'liberals,' more angry right now?" Maybe because it's more difficult to be angry with what you believe to be "your own team," and easier to be angry with what you perceive to be "the opposing team." I think the team mentality is at the root of it all -- both the inability by some (those who align themselves with the "Republican team") to be appropriately angry with when Bush was president, and the inability by some (those who align themselves with the "Democrat team") to be appropriately angry now. Appropriately angry? I think I am appropriately angry. If I thought I had reason to be more angry than I am, then I would be. I guess I'm still waiting, 20 posts into this thread, for someone - anyone - to explain to me why I should be more angry than I am.

servantforuse -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 7:48:05 PM)
As a conservative, union member republican, I'm not mad about anything. I do not like the policies of this administrstion and hope the good guys regain a majority in 2010.

rulemylife -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 7:54:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse As a conservative, union member republican, I'm not mad about anything. I do not like the policies of this administrstion and hope the good guys regain a majority in 2010. The good guys? Case in point.

shannie -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 8:07:06 PM)
repeat post

servantforuse -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 8:24:06 PM)
Spinner, before Obama got elected, did you ask why the liberals were so mad.? If you did I guess I missed it.

shannie -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 8:25:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda Appropriately angry? I think I am appropriately angry. If I thought I had reason to be more angry than I am, then I would be. I guess I'm still waiting, 20 posts into this thread, for someone - anyone - to explain to me why I should be more angry than I am. I don't know if you should be more angry than you are, because I don't know your current anger level. Is it the same or less than when Bush was president? :) As for me, I'm angry/dissatisfied for the exact same reasons that I was when Bush was president. (Although I find myself more distressed as it becomes increasingly clear that the change in administrations/parties -- Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, Obama -- is just for show.)

SpinnerofTales -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 8:46:51 PM)
quote: Spinner, before Obama got elected, did you ask why the liberals were so mad.? If you did I guess I missed it. ORIGINAL: servantforuse I am not claiming that progressives (without pointing fingers, there was a group that so bad mouthing liberals that we had to change our name) weren't angry. I still don't think that there was this extreme level of rage among them that we are seeing from the right wing. I don't recall seeing progressives bringing obviously displayed firearms to public demonstrations. I do not remember them brandishing swastikas. And while there was strong and angry objections to the Patriot act and other matters felt to threaten the constitution, no one suggested that Bush was trying to fundamentally change our form of government from democracy to Stalinism. I certainly do not remember any democratic congressman shouting out that Bush was lying during an address during a joint session of congress. Am I mistaken in perception to think that the level of anger has risen noticeably in the last six months?

servantforuse -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 8:50:00 PM)
You must have missed hearing 30 to 40 democrats booing Bush during his State of the Union address. I guess that was ok to do in your mind ?

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:00:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shannie quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda Appropriately angry? I think I am appropriately angry. If I thought I had reason to be more angry than I am, then I would be. I guess I'm still waiting, 20 posts into this thread, for someone - anyone - to explain to me why I should be more angry than I am. I don't know if you should be more angry than you are, because I don't know your current anger level. Is it the same or less than when Bush was president? :) Less. Definitely less! I can actually watch the evening news these days without jumping up and barreling across the room to bite the television. quote: ORIGINAL: shannie As for me, I'm angry/dissatisfied for the exact same reasons that I was when Bush was president. (Although I find myself more distressed as it becomes increasingly clear that the change in administrations/parties -- Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, Obama -- is just for show.) You know, you make an intriguing point and (in your other post) ask a worthwhile question. I don't want to seem as though I'm ducking that question, but I need to reflect on it a while in order to give it a worthwhile answer. I've got a clear idea of where I want to go with it, but I want to mull it over and explore it a bit before I respond. Took some percocet for my back tonight, and I'm a little foggy for deep introspection and articulate soapboxing.

rulemylife -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:02:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse You must have missed hearing 30 to 40 democrats booing Bush during his State of the Union address. I guess that was ok to do in your mind ? And how many times did the same thing happen with Republicans booing Clinton? That's hardly the same thing as interrupting the President's speech by screaming out that he is a liar.

popeye1250 -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:07:16 PM)
I'm not angry I'm dissapointed.

shannie -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:09:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I'm not angry I'm dissapointed. If you're not angry, you're not paying attention. (giggles at you.)

Grofast -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:10:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse You must have missed hearing 30 to 40 democrats booing Bush during his State of the Union address. I guess that was ok to do in your mind ? And how many times did the same thing happen with Republicans booing Clinton? That's hardly the same thing as interrupting the President's speech by screaming out that he is a liar. How is it any different then polozie and other democratic leaders refering to any that oppose tyhier views as fascist or nazis. He appologised to the liar obama now let it go unless you want to contiue to help him build his warchest for re-election, hmmmmmmmmm on second thought keep ridin him make him a hero for all those that secretly wanted do do just what he did

FirmhandKY -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:12:44 PM)
It's simple. There has been little, if any real debate in this country for several years. The left has adopted techniques in which the very humanity of their opposition is placed into question by their words. Now, they have the ability to enforce their belief that all who have a different opinion or set of values are sub-human, dishonest, amoral, criminal, misled or simply stupid, and must be ignored, "managed", squashed, or "re-educated" "for their own good". In fact, the very question of the OP is based on this faulty belief. The "angry left" has been seen as normal and totally within their right to conduct protests and other forms of "direct political action" ... while any attempt by the right to do so is seen as illegitimate (evil, wrong, stupid, etc, etc, etc). It's perfectly "ok" to seek to radicalize the population in order to effect political change ... but only if you are a left leaning statist. Fuck that. If it worked for the left ... why is it denied the right? Live with it. Firm

Sanity -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:18:02 PM)
The president was calling conservatives liars, while he was the one who was actually lying, so I don't see what the big deal is. I think Newt said it well when he said, "I can go through the president's speech and find a lot of things that I like. Then I go to the House Democratic bill and I don't find a single one of those things reflected in the legislation. Now, they, they literally had voted down efforts to make sure that health insurance only went to people who are legally in the United States. So they would have to go back and have very significant changes, which I think would split the Democratic caucus. And I think part of the reason you saw some, some real anger about the speech is he kept describing things that had been explicitly not put in the bill on the House side, and the House bill has no resemblance to the president's speech. " http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/09/13/gingrich-explains-how-obama-incited-wilsons-you-lie-outburst quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse You must have missed hearing 30 to 40 democrats booing Bush during his State of the Union address. I guess that was ok to do in your mind ? And how many times did the same thing happen with Republicans booing Clinton? That's hardly the same thing as interrupting the President's speech by screaming out that he is a liar.

philosophy -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:23:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales Am I mistaken in perception to think that the level of anger has risen noticeably in the last six months? ...yes. However, it's an easy mistake to make. When one's 'side' is in power then one is generally less angry than when they're in opposition. What you're noticing is only a relative amount of anger, not an absolute one. When the Republicans were in power, then Democrats were just as angry as Republicans are now.

FirmhandKY -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:25:44 PM)
FR: "I'm as mad as hell" Firm

SpinnerofTales -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:30:26 PM)
quote: It's simple. There has been little, if any real debate in this country for several years. The left has adopted techniques in which the very humanity of their opposition is placed into question by their words. Now, they have the ability to enforce their belief that all who have a different opinion or set of values are sub-human, dishonest, amoral, criminal, misled or simply stupid, and must be ignored, "managed", squashed, or "re-educated" "for their own good". In fact, the very question of the OP is based on this faulty belief. The "angry left" has been seen as normal and totally within their right to conduct protests and other forms of "direct political action" ... while any attempt by the right to do so is seen as illegitimate (evil, wrong, stupid, etc, etc, etc). It's perfectly "ok" to seek to radicalize the population in order to effect political change ... but only if you are a left leaning statist. Fuck that. If it worked for the left ... why is it denied the right? Live with it. ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Just to understand this, Firm, you are again claiming that it is all the "left leaning statists" fault and if currently certain republicans are doing the very things you claim wrong from the left it is ok to do so because it is a response? For example: If someone says things in his posts that he admits are lies, that is a justifiable thing because the left did it previously? Or are you saying that the left was correct in employing these tactics and now the right has seen that they were correct and adopted them? Or is it your point that the republicans are incapable in making their point in any better manner than the democrats (pardon me, left leaning statists) and so must now sink to the level of lies, demonization and shouting you claim they inflicted on the country? Perhaps you are saying that it's wrong when the left did these things but ok for the republicans because they didn't start it? Please, do make yourself clear on this issue.

rulemylife -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:32:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Grofast How is it any different then polozie and other democratic leaders refering to any that oppose tyhier views as fascist or nazis. He appologised to the liar obama now let it go unless you want to contiue to help him build his warchest for re-election, hmmmmmmmmm on second thought keep ridin him make him a hero for all those that secretly wanted do do just what he did I don't have to make him a hero. The conservatives already have. And his "apology" could barely be called that, because in the next breath he proudly proclaimed how much support he has received for his rudeness.

rulemylife -> RE: What Are the Conservatives So Mad At? (9/13/2009 9:40:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity The president was calling conservatives liars, while he was the one who was actually lying, so I don't see what the big deal is. I think Newt said it well when he said, "I can go through the president's speech and find a lot of things that I like. Then I go to the House Democratic bill and I don't find a single one of those things reflected in the legislation. Now, they, they literally had voted down efforts to make sure that health insurance only went to people who are legally in the United States. Is this the same Newt who resigned in disgrace as Speaker of the House or a different Newt, being that it's such a common name?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.699707E-02