Thank you

Randy,

To some degree it is because they don’t have rational arguments. They have driven away most of the conservatives who actually think and can make coherent arguments.

Part of it is circular logic, reinforced by their echo chamber. There is nothing in Obama’s statement to justify the claim that he hates the troops and hates America. They already have this view, despite the lack of anything to back it up, and therefore they find a way to spin what he says to support their prejudices. As there is nothing in what he actually said, they come up with convoluted arguments such as that he was too cool and calm in how he spoke (ignoring that this is how he always speaks) or they mix up his planned event with the statement on Fort Hood that was quickly added on in response to the breaking news.

Republicans are increasingly adopting the Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh style. It seemed to work for a while, and continues to work among portions of the country, but for the most part this is why they have become primarily a regional party and have lost the support of an entire generation.

The inane and pathetic attempts by our conservative politicians to come up with anything that will get their name mentioned and feed the frenzy of the so-called conservative movement would be laughable except for the number of people that seem to believe it.  

I honestly believe that having witnessed the media success of Glen Beck and his ilk that the conservative politicians have decided that rather than working hard and having serious debate about these very important issues, they will pattern their behavior after Mr. Beck and the other conservative talk show hosts.  I would caution those conservative politicians that have sacrificed their self respect for 15 minutes that other people have been successful on television and radio too,  Jerry Springer comes to mind.

The original post was a response to a comparison between Bush and Obama. The discussion and later via updates the post itself also responded to the criticism of Obama. It doesn’t make any sense to say there should not be a comparison. By what standard do we judge situations like there where there are no absolute rules? Looking at how other presidents have acted in analogous situations is one way to look at it.

“And, to dismiss anyone else’s opinion of Obama that is not in strict line with the liberal mindset as “haters” or even “racists” is just as fragile in that, once again, it is an attack on the “feelings” of people instead of a discussion of the policies and merits of Mr. Obama himself.”

But this attack which you repeat is not based upon policies and is not a serious complaint. The attack is so absurd that there is no other possible explanation other than hatred of Obama to bring it up. This has nothing to do with a liberal mindset. It is an opposition to smear tactics, regardless of where they are coming from. This is purely a smear campaign without any meaningful content.

Excuse me–did you even bother to read the discussion here. It makes it pretty clear that matters such as this are not black or white.

Bush screwed up with 9/11 period. He screwed up in not paying attention to the warnings about al Qaeda which came from the Clinton administration. He screwed up in not paying attention to the intelligence briefings before the attack. He showed a lack of leadership in the first two days after the attack. He ultimately played politics with the attack as opposed to responding responsibly.

“What bothers me far more about Obama was the photo with the flag drapped coffin.”

So much for you not saying that nothing is black or white as you twist everything in favor of Bush and against Obama. Obama has paid attention to the casualties while Bush was notable for failing to attend any funerals or show similar concern while in office.

“Because of him, GWB and at least so far Pres Obama, it’s the terrorists living in caves,looking over their shoulders for that drone missle or that special forces unit to take them out before they can kill me, my children, or yours.”

And if not for Bush’s poor decisions after 9/11 there would be far less terrorists living in caves. For example, it was Bush’s incompetence which allowed bin Laden to escape when he could have been captured at Tora Bora.

“Their only hope is that with liberals in power, we will finally admit that 9/11 was our fault to begin with, take a more ‘enlightened’ approach, and lower our guard so that they can make 9/11 look like a Sunday picnic.”

It is the liberals who wanted to take action to prevent such attacks–often over the objections of conservatives. It was Democrats who were warning about the problem while Republicans failed to take it seriously. John Kerry, among others, was warning about this threat for years before 9/11. The Republican Congress blocked Clinton’s attempts to fight al Qaeda. Still Clinton was successful in stopping the planned Millennium Attack while Bush screwed up with 9/11.

“Just remember, it might just as well be your children as someone elses. ”

Right. That is why we cannot trust the Republicans to handle national security since they have been taken over by ideologues who are out of touch with reality. We need to take pragmatic action to defend the country, not allow the right wingers to use such threats to wage their ideological battles.

Besides, it is quite common in politics for many people to accept and even defend things coming from their side and attack the same behavior from the other. While there is a stronger emotional overtone to the hatred of Obama, I’ve seen the same phenomenon here when liberals have objected to some of my criticism of Democrats.

From time to time there are also attacks on Republicans which pop up in the liberal blogs which I don’t bother with as they are trivial and I also think that those making the attacks are doing so based upon their overall feelings about the politician, not the specifics of the incident. (On some occasions, when the attacks were too off the wall, I’ve even defended the Republican or questioned the wisdom of bothering with meaningless attacks.)

What point? This is a post responding to a comparison between Bush and Obama. Therefore the post is going to compare the two. You made no point.

“Instead of doing that, consider it as him standing alone in what he does or doesn’t do and take the “argument” from there.”

You miss the topic of the post and what this is responding to. Looking at Obama’s actions there is really no meaningful argument. Comparisons also become significant here because this is a case where people are making senseless attacks on Obama due to their feelings about him which never would be made if not for such feelings, or if the same behavior came from a politician they supported.

“Your assumption that all “the right wing hates Obama” is a superflous over-simplification and a subjective generality.”

There is really no other explanation for the ridiculous attacks being made.

“Rightly he apologized but, think seriously, would you have had a knee-jerk reaction like that?”

Considering the amount of racism in this country, it is perfectly understandable that Obama would make such assumptions in light of such police actions against a black professor. Of course being president he also needs to be more careful than most in expressing such views as he learned from the episode.

“To divert accusations back to me personally instead of responding solely to the discussion in a dispassionate but respectful manner would have been the wiser course.”

Actually you proved my point in your response.