The Republican Party is creating a history they will not be proud of, when the history books are written on the times we live in!
Yes, every President has opposition from the party out of power in the White House!
But the level of hate against Barack Obama is beyond all sane limits!
One faction, the establishment Wall Street Republicans, hate Obama for the gall that he has, expecting that after years of lack of regulation of Wall Street and the oil companies, and years of massive tax cuts for the top two percent, that he dares to promote regulation, and higher taxation of the wealthy!
Another faction, the Tea Party radicals, are out to return America to the 19th century, condemning everything the New Deal of FDR and the Great Society of LBJ have done to promote equity, fairness, and justice in America in the past century, and they see Barack Obama as the inheritor of those highly popular and successful programs! Instead, they want to put labor, women, minorities, and the poor back to the times that existed in the Gilded Age and early 20th century, a time of laissez faire capitalism and Social Darwinism. And much of the Tea Party Movement resembles the old South of the Confederacy, longing for a return to the pre Civil War mentality, as well! And therefore, the average middle class person is being exploited by the right wing groups led by the Koch Brothers and other corporate interests, who see a way to manipulate public opinion for their own selfish, greedy desires to dominate and increase their acquisition of wealth at the expense of 98 percent of the population!
And then, there are the Christian conservatives, who want to control our private lives and impose a theocracy on America, denying the Founding Fathers’ promotion of separation of church and state. In so doing, they wish to cause more control over our lives, while rejecting economic regulation and pushing social regulations, and they see Obama as a threat to their agenda!
The fact that we have been experiencing the effects of the Great Recession has allowed these groups to exploit the situation, and allow them to make it seem as if Barack Obama has created these conditions, when these groups are simply acting demagogic in their desire for control, and advancement of their own agendas, against the interests of the American people at large!
Excellent post Professor!
I was going to comment on this post, but after reading and re-reading it carefully I came to the conclusion that the vision you have of the opposition is so extreme that even trying to engage in a civilized discussion would be a truly futile act. So I rather not. I happen to oppose almost every single aspect of the Democrat Party and the Obama’s administration policies. What am I then?
Robert, you have a right to your views, and I am not going to label you, but to be against what Obama does, seems to imply that what the Republicans have done in the past under Bush II, and their total obstructionism since 2009 is a good thing. If you can live with that, so be it, but I think how they have conducted themselves is reprehensible, and indefensible, particularly the widespread hate that has never been matched under any other President, including Richard Nixon.
I believe I have never stated that what the Republicans have done under George W. Bush was a good thing. Personally I disagreed heavily with many policies, probably not the same ones you have probably disagreed with. I also recall the hatred and disdain that was spewed from the progressive side and from the press towards the Bush administration. As for Republican opposition, well frankly the Republicans were powerless until they took back the House in the 2010 elections, thank mainly to the conservative movement. So between 2009 and 2011, actually since 2007 , the Democrats I believe controlled both Houses of Congress. So you can imagine I opposed Congress’s actions since at least 2007. And even this House led by Boehner is totally ineffective in dealing with Obama. I would give the Republican leadership a D for its lack of intelligence, audacity and guts to oppose the progressive agenda. Agenda which in my humble opinion is so easy and simple to oppose,stop and defeat. So I repeat, l oppose the Obama administration’s policies because a)they are against my views about what good government is and b) they are impractical, as Obamacare for example clearly is demonstrating to be. So I will stop here, since going any further is as I have stated already a futile act.
Furthermore, and just to be clear, it is not my intention to change anyone’s view, especially yours Ronald. You have your views and I have mine, some of which are completely irreconcilable because our starting points are based on absolutely different visions.
Robert, I remind you that ObamaCare is basically RomneyCare in Massachusetts, and the Heritage Foundation idea of 1993 in opposition to Hillary Clinton’s proposals, ideas promoted by Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole at the time, but now the Heritage Foundation is opposed to what it and they believed and supported 20 years ago, because Obama accepted it rather than push for the progressive goal of Medicare for all!
And the hatred and disdain under Bush was nowhere what it is under Obama, not by any margin. The hate now is more like what it was against Lincoln in the South during the Civil War, and much of the same area of the country is the center point of the hate now!
I respect, Robert, that you have stated what you have just above, and I respect your right to disagree, and this is what makes America great!
@Robert
There’s absolutely nothing extremist about the Professor’s post.
Ronald; thanks you for your respect. As for Obamacare and Romneycare, the Heritage and Gingrich, so? I really don’t agree with any of them, be it Romneycare, or the Heritage or Gingrich. A bad idea is a bad idea whether it comes from the Heritage or Obama or whomever. Though I must add that even those who proposed the idea at the Heritage originally later changes their minds when the received new data and “evolved” on the issue. So I think it cannot be held against them if the have a rational basis for changing their minds. Unless you believe that the only ones entitled to change and “evolve” are liberals. Like when Obama “evolved” on gay marriage, lobbyist access to the White House, campaign donations, taxes, the mandate and your right to keep your doctor/insurance plan under Obamacare, Guantanamo, domestic surveillance and drone attacks on American citizens just to name a few. Now comparing somehow even remotely Obama with Lincoln… well lets say it just leaves me speechless for a lack of a better word. As for the Bush hatred I suggest you look around YouTube, it seems you might have missed something during those 8 years. We are truly looking at this through a completely different vision.
Leia: Respectfully I disagree. His vision of the opposition leaves no room for discussion, debate or analysis. That is respectfully my opinion.
I have had people who hate Obama say he is the most divisive President since Lincoln, and the death threats against both were on a similar scale, if one considers the population was one tenth what it is today back in the 1860s. And it is not only because of disagreement with Obama, but also what he represents racially! Those are the facts!
And Bush did not have to deal with lunatic talk show hosts as are found on Talk Radio and Fox News Channel, which spew poison and hate 24-7, and will not give Obama the time of day on ANYTHING!
Robert,
He’s just telling the truth. I’ve experienced the opposition myself in my neighborhood and that’s how they are.
Ronald, respectfully we have a totally different vision on the issues. As I recall it was Obama who was the first aggressor condescendingly branding people living in small towns as people who “get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” All because they live in economically depressed areas or don’t agree with Obama’s definition of progress. Again, respectfully I suggest take a tour through YouTube or MRC archives to remind you how the press treated Bush. Day and night compared to how they treat Obama. I mean , they can do whatever they want, but please lets not fool ourselves.
Leia: I have also experience and met with people who oppose Obama and they are not like that. So you have your personal experiences and I have mine. As a matter of fact I am one of those opposed to Obama. Am I a hateful racist? Seriously I don’t like to generalize. Otherwise I would have to believe that all progressive leftist are like the some of the Occupy Wall Street wacko extremist or like that famous woman who said she voted for Obama because he was “gonna take care of her and she wouldn’t have to pay no more rent”. I’m pretty sure they are not all like that, are you like that Leia? I hope that is not the case.
Very much agree with the Professor too. I live in a small Southern town and they definitely do cling to their guns and their religion.
Exactly right Jane Doe!
@Leia
You were suspicious in another thread that Robert’s posts remind you of Guano. I’m also suspicious about that.
Why are some people so disrespectful towards other people who either have guns or are religious? Why be so disdainful and use the phrase “cling to guns and religion.” Since when is religion or owning a gun such a bad thing?
Excellent criticism of religion: http://www.religiouscriticism.com/beliefs/why-is-religion-bad/
Excellent critique of America’s gun culture: http://leftcall.com/14296/guns-religion-cling-obama-america-culture-nra-second-amendment/
Ronald I found this very interesting article on one of your favorite site. http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.com/news/article/its-uphill-all-the-way-for-social-conservatives
Just go to show who biased the media and Hollywood really are.
Excellent articles Leia!
More like the media is right-wing biased: http://www.politicususa.com/2013/01/27/liberal-media-there-trails-right-wing-media-presence-long-ways.html
Totally agree about that, Jane Doe!
Robert, could you clarify MRC Archives, as that acronym escapes me! Thanks! But having followed events very closely, I find it hard to believe that it is night and day difference between criticism of Bush and of Obama!
Does anyone know which is the largest charitable organization in the world? The Catholic Church. https://www.facebook.com/notes/michael-sanchez/the-catholic-church-is-the-largest-charitable-organization-in-the-world/399364450111086
Does anyone ever hear about the young priests priest who die weekly in places around Africa, Asia and the Middle East by helping the poor and hopeless? Killed by warlords, beheaded or struck down by disease. Of course that never makes the news. While some write articles condemning religion in general from the comfort of their safe homes, without ever in their lives feeding the hungry or helping those in need, without ever risking their lives to feed the poor and spread hope to those that are without hope, others, young and old brave priest risk everything. But you will never hear about them on CNN or anywhere. They work in silence while all you will ever hear about are those other wretched unforgivable souls that committed the worst type of abuses. That you will surely hear about.
Robert, you are totally correct in what you have said above about the Catholic Church, and I have never contended otherwise, while at the same time, condemnatory toward the abuses and corruption that we have learned about in recent years!
I think this link has the largest archives clips of news and reporting ,since I believe 1989. As a historian I think this data base , though I must warn you comes from a conservative site who’s goal is to expose the media liberal bias and you will not like that, nevertheless it has a wealth of archives. You just go to the video tab, then to the bottom and click “last” . It takes you all the way back to the 90’s. http://www.mrctv.org/videos . Just go to the bottom and click “last” to do some time traveling. I at least find it interesting to see Dan Rather in 1995 describe the GOP legislative agenda, calling it a plan to “demolish or damage government aid programs, many of them designed to help children and the poor.” http://www.mrctv.org/videos/classic-dan-rather-gop-plans-demolish-or-damage-aid-kids-and-poor
Or to look at ABC’s Sam Donaldson in 1997 equated Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich with the first communist dictator of Russia. “Newt Gingrich’s problem, I’ve always thought, he’s like Lenin. They both made a revolution by shooting people — Newt shot Democrats, Lenin shot everybody — and then they didn’t have enough sense to stop shooting once they won.” http://www.mrctv.org/videos/sam-donaldson-gingrich-lenin-only-shot-democrats .
Thank you Ronald, I never thought nor implied that you did. I was mainly referring to one of the articles Leia posted where they generalize that all religion is bad. As I always say , I never try to generalize. There is good and bad everywhere.
Robert, this site is a propaganda site with one sided viewpoints. And Gingrich intended to hurt the poorest among us, and only Clinton’s veto stopped the worst aspect of the Contract with America, which I saw as the Contract ON America! And there is plenty of conservative media bias, much more than is admitted by the RIght! Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly on this!
Well Ronald, as I said its stated purpose is to expose liberal bias in the media. It is not falsely claiming to be a neutral news outlet, like ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and the rest. But you asked where you could find all the trash the media laid on Bush and I just referred you to the site. It’s the same media that never informed us or made a national scandal out of the Roderick Scott case when he shot killed 17 yr. old Christopher Cervini in self-defense in Rochester, New York. So excuse me if I really do not trust them. But then again, that is just me.
I must admit, Robert, that I have never heard of this Scott-Cervini case until just now, and I tend to follow the news closely!
This is a interesting comparison between the two cases. Differences and similarities.
http://www.decodedscience.com/roderick-scott-the-black-george-zimmerman-acquitted-of-murder/33569
Very interesting comparison, and disturbing that it was not publicized at the time in the news media. Thanks, Robert!
Robert
That religious site that Leia posted is telling the truth about religion.
It has it’s positives:
Pros:
– provides people with a sense of belonging/community. Community is strengthened through communal rituals (worship, sacrifice, celebration etc).
– provides a set of rules for society, moral and otherwise.
– explains, or attempts to explain, the meaning of life and the world, and reassures people about fears like death, sickness etc.
– gives meaning to misfortune. If someone dies from illness, it’s God’s will, or a test, or whatever.
– health services. In Europe, for ages, it was the monasteries that set up hospitals to take care of the sick who couldn’t afford doctors. There are healers of some kind in most religious groups.
– looking after the poor. That’s a tenet of quite a few faiths; even now we have lots of religious charities.
– learning, history etc. In Europe again, the Catholic monks would preserve history by writing it down; many of the medieval texts we have now are church documents. Monks were pretty much the only non-nobles who could read and write, too. Without that institution, I’m not sure we’d have widespread literacy now. I don’t know what it’s like elsewhere.
– counselling/therapy. Most religious groups provide some form of this to people; usually informed by whatever belief they hold, of course.
But it also has always had it’s negatives:
Cons:
– it can cause conflict as people disagree over beliefs and even fight over it – the holy wars being one example, but for a more recent one, see the Christianity-versus-atheism debate that’s going on. If you handed YouTubers swords, you’d have a holy war in no time.
– persecution of particular groups, although the religious group could be either the perpetrator (Spanish Inquisition) or the target (Jews in Nazi Germany).
– it can mess people up individually if taken to extremes – a Christian-raised gay man might struggle more than a non-religious person to accept himself, or someone raised in a strictly religious household might have strong feelings of guilt or shame or fear to overcome.
– it can lead to fanaticism, where people end up drinking the Kool-Aid or handing over all their money or similar – cults, basically.
– can be used to justify crimes, including war, murder, terrorism, etc.
– can open the doors to abuse, depending on how the institution is set up – if you look at the history of the Catholic church in Ireland, until quite recently, it’s pretty grim.
– can obstruct progress, scientific and otherwise, because it’s “against God” or whatever – again, plenty of examples in history.
Yes! Exactly right Jane Doe!
Princess Leia and Jane Doe:
After several days now of intensive assessment, i have come to the conclusion that it’s again time to gas up the Bat Mobile. Who wants to ride along, or drive?
@Maggie
I’m all for it!
I’m all for it too!
Ok Ladies, we will pick up Alfred Pennyworth (aka Engineer ) on the way! LOL!