CSpan discussing "Are haters a threat to democracy?"

[mandyky]

based on The Presidency Wars by David Brooks from yesterday's NY Times - http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/30/opinion/30BROO.html?ex=1065499200&en=1f730f8c5cc56e5b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[TennesseeWalker]

1. BS.

HE needs to look into the issues a little further. Some may be hating without facts, but there are enough facts to cut down this shrub without irrational hatred. And as for the Gray Lady, I say...."What Liberal Media"?

[mandyky]

2. Agreed, to him haters=dissenters

Lots of liberal callers thank goodness.
We don't personally hate dumbya, we just see that all his plans turn out to be unworkable.

[bowens43]

6. Well that's not quite true for all of us.

I do hate the idiot personally but it is BECAUSE of his policies. I started out just believing him to be either naive or fool, now I believe him to be evil.

[Brian Sweat]

18. I personally hate dumbya.

I think he is the epitomy of the leisure class and its sense of entitlement.

[asjr]

3. brooks

Brooks has an R by his name. If he truly believed haters are a threat to democracy, where was he during the Clinton administration? The machine has been well-oiled and he has started the engine. Watch for more of this. I find him to be a sleaze. He was on The News Hour one night bashing Hillary's book, but then had to admit he had not read it.

[Zero Gravitas]

13. Brooks is shameless

just like the rest of them. He is one of those conservatives who retroactively was against the Clinton-haters but kept his mouth firmly shut on the subject until their little boy-king is the subject of hatred. This really pissed me off, these people now claim that they "always respected the office, if not the man" What utter bullshit! I can't reacll once right wing media voice ever saying anything of the kind during the eight years of the Clinton Presidency.

Another thing Brooks et. al. convieniently forgets is that the Clinton hatred was based on his "character". Clinton governed as a moderate. The Bush hatred is centered on the stolen election and his governing from the far right (unilaterism, John Ashcroft, blank check to the oil industry etc.)

Bush has never even acknolowedged that he lost the popular vote, that the majority of voters wanted someone else to be President. He is a divider and not a uniter. He doesn't even try to reach out to the majority that voted against him. They never mention that either.

[teryang]

4. More lies from the flat earth society

Sounds like he is describing repuke policy for the last eleven years.

[mandyky]

5. One caller pegged what we feel

We hear hatred from the likes of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, and we get angry and frustrated by the lies and accusations of treason etc.

[mandyky]

7. Maybe Will Pitt can do a rebuttal piece... (hint, hint)

Obviously this was a slap at the Democrat Party and people who take offense at dumbya and his policies, and have the audacity to be vocal about it.

[ninkasi]

19. Please, please, please...

it's Democratic Party, not "Democrat" Party. I don't wish to seem overly critical, but don't let Tom Delay dictate how you refer to our party. He and other conservatives constantly misname us, and I hate to see us fall into their trap.

[screembloodymurder]

8. This is outrageous timing

They are simply trying to mislable a legitimate probe of WH criminal activity as hate mongering. Where was CSPAN when they impeached Clinton. I used to think they were unbiased, but not anymore.

[leetrisck]

9. Remember when President Clinton

asked "talk radio" to tone down the hate after Oklahoma City? The Repukes crucified him.

[edzontar]

10. CSPAN is now PUKESPAN

And I really HATE it. OK?

[cprise]

11. Do you hate haters?

Then for shame...

[searchingforlight]

12. This country rose from a pit of hatred and angry discourse.

He and all of his compatriots need to start looking back in history. We have an angry past and the only time it has been fairly civil it was because there were so many "social rules" that the surface tension made it appear all was calm.

What they are sowing in this country is much worse than hatred. It is selfishness gone amok. I would advise them to read more about the French Revolution. There will come a day when the people will say - "I'm mad and I just won't take it anymore!!"

[mandyky]

14. Yay - Joe Conason addresses Brooks' article

on his blog - http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/09/30/brooks/index_np.html

WTG Joe!

[mandyky]

15. I am still fuming over Brooks

Let's email him some (as Guy James would say) some Democratic Love, hopefully more intelligent than the GJS Repub Love. :)

[dkamin]

16. My email to Brooks

Are you insane? Ann Coulter wrote a book called Treason, accusing liberals of giving aid and comfort to the enemy for the last 50 years, and Pat Robertson, in the days following 9/11 said that NYC deserved 9/11 because of its liberalism and only now do you find it problematic that there is "hatred"?

You people are despicable, and the true America-haters. No liberal I know has ever accused someone who disagreed with them of being a traitor, or hating America, or supporting terrorism, whereas a surprisingly high number of conservatives believe this garbage.

It's pretty clear to me that if you believe that somewhere between 40-50% of the American population is worthy of being hated, that there's no substantive difference between that and hating America itself.

This "problem" of hatred starts and ends with your side of the aisle, sir. It started with the right-wing crap being stated about Clinton every day, which, incidentally, almost certainly hampered Clinton's very real obsession with combatting terrorism. It goes on today, as conservatives accuse every liberal criticism of Republican policy, whether of invading Iraq or of tax cuts, as being unpatriotic, and accusing liberals of allowing 9/11 to happen. This country is much much worse today because of the conservative elite, which is doing its best to sink this country into third-world pariah status.

[mandyky]

17. Excellent letter!

Let us know if you get a response.

[starscape]

21. right on!

But it's not what people like him want to read. He'll probably chalk it up as more "hatred." People like him are delsusional, and your email is right on the money.

Hatred of a president took on a whole new level during Clinton's campaign. It became personal. It became about the man himself, not the politics or the presidency. The repukes set that standard, and I think we can expect to live with it now for a long time to come.

[the_real_38]

20. I got a letter published today in NY times ...

.... on this very subject. I spelled out what is dislikeable about Bush's policies, not his person :

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/01/opinion/L01BROO.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fLetters

[starscape]

22. which letter is yours?

There are several on the page.

[the_real_38]

25. The first one.

To the Editor:

David Brooks ("The Presidency Wars," column, Sept. 30) is dismayed by the "haters" of President Bush on the left, whose critiques, he claims, lack focus on policy and arise mainly from personal enmity. But it shouldn't be so difficult for anyone to put details to their dissent, these days.

It is not hate that drives my own dissatisfaction with the president, but his failed economic and budget policies, his destructive and backward environmental initiatives, his dubious and shifting logic for the Iraq invasion and his practice of crony capitalism in the reconstruction of the occupied country.



( I didn't want to post my name here - I ain't exactly shakespeare

[revcarol]

23. Can you post your letter here?

Oviously not NY Times copyrighted material, and never can remember my password there.

[mandyky]

29. Wow, there were quite a few of them!

Great job to all who wrote (DUers and others).

[Gringo]

24. What an ignorant @$&@($(@$!

All of us who DESPISE Bush do so for a myriad of well-founded resons. It's so hard to find something to like about the man or his filthy administration.

I disagreed with Reagan on most things, but I didn't hate him. I didn't even hate Nixon- Heck, he had a few good accomplishments.

Bush is the exact opposite of the "excellence" that repukes always preach about.

[denverbill]

26. Brooks is a fucking moron.

The 'haters' come from the right, and began under Clinton. The left is just responding to 8 years of adject hatred from the right with a much more deserved hatred of the right.

Yes, dumbass, haters are a threat to Democracy. So get fucking Limbaugh, Savage, Boortz, and the other right-wing assholes off the radio and we'll start talking about 'changing the tone' you ignorant fuckwad.

[nannygoat]

27. Here are some great liberal responses to the * hate is

worse than the Clinton hate (they've been posted in DU the past but I thought it would be good to put them all in one place):

WHY WE HATE BUSH by Ted Rall
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=7&u=/030925/7/5dmdb.html

Bush-haters by Molly Ivins
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/09/272297.shtml

I hate republicans
http://www.ericblumrich.com/ihr.html

[not systems]

28. End of culture wars not a chance.

Brooks claims that the culture wars and ideological
battles of the 80' gave way to "Presidency wars" is
baloney. The reason people on the right hated Clinton
was because he stood for an open society and increasing
the opportunity for economic mobility in society.

I hate Bush because he stands for a culture of xenophobia
and reduced opportunity for people to move up in society.
He has circled the wagons around the resources of society
a declared them the birth-right of him and his.

It is about ideology and culture and I hate Bush for it.