Liberal Vitriol

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
You know, I can remember as a kid back in the 70's and later as a young(er) adult in the 80's and 90's that liberals and conservatives always had huge differences in political philosophy and ideology. I can remember liberals and conservatives always vehemently disagreeing over their political postures. I can remember protests even over their ideologies between conservatives and liberals.

However, I can NOT remember a time when political opposition openly hoped, pleaded, for the destruction of the entire country. I can't remember that ever happening. I can't remember people actively wishing for a worldwide financial meltdown, or a nuclear war, just to spite a single person or president. I can't remember that.

Am I missing something here?

With the exception of Trump, one of the most universally disliked and polarizing presidents I can recall is probably a toss up between Bush Jr. and Obama. However, even then I don't remember the opposition actively wishing for the downfall of the entire country just to smite their political foe. I don't remember that.

Yet today we have people gleefully talking about nuclear war with North Korea because it will smite Trump, actively wishing for a cataclysmic global financial crisis because it will finally finally justify their vitriol about Trump. I never thought I would see a time when the political opposition (read liberals in this case) would openly wish for harm to themselves, their loved ones and all their fellow countrymen just to prove some point.

Something has fundamentally changed in people's mindset. What is it?

You didn't pay attention very well during the last administration, did you.

I am very willing to be wrong on this ... but I genuinely think that some of us have simply forgotten what happens in times one party controls the government.

a reply to: Gryphon66

the Republicans do not control the government

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Gryphon66

the Republicans do not control the government

The fact that they control all 3 branches of government means they don't control government?

a reply to: Greven

With that response its obvious you do not know how the government works I suggest taking a civics class

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Greven

With that response its obvious you do not know how the government works I suggest taking a civics class

It's real funny how you immediately attack my person.

What definition do you have of 'control' eh?

The President? Republican
The Senate? 52 of 100 are Republican
The House? 241 of 435 are Republican
The SCOTUS? 5 of 9 appointed by Republicans

Whatever definition of 'control' you have doesn't match any political science I have studied.

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

An egotistical and amoral buisnessman who thought he was losing the election and was offered a deal by the Russian government to swing the election..


And he didn’t have to trade one single drop of American blood, treasure or territory.

Just sanctions and staying out of Ukraine..


Aka 2 things you couldn’t get 12 Americans to care about..

Aka not a deal that requires a super villian.. just an amoral buisnessman

a reply to: Greven

I don't think you are dumb. That means you are intentionally being disingenuous. You know that it requires 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation, yet you pretend that isn't reality.

As bad as you feel now, prepare for things to get worse. The liberal movements reach has exceeded its grasp, and there will be a centrist backlash.

Moderate democrats are leaving the party.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Not saying I agree with your paranoid ramblings........lol

But it would be a small price to pay to get some s##t done for once before I die.

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
It's Anti-Trump Derangement Syndrome
Unless someone else has evidence to dispute that conclusion, I'm sticking with it. (which they don't, unless these people you describe in your OP have seen a psychologist within the last two years)

Typical...make stuff up and call it science.

a reply to: kaylaluv

The first two I can agree with but the last two no. Rush didn't want America to fail, he did not want obama to go foward with his plans, as in obamacare, that he felt were not in the nations best interests. I can't fault him for that. The MSNBC piece is little more than Rush not wanting harmful legislation to pass knowing it would damage the health care system.

I was sad an angry when obamacare was passed. It was a mistake and still is, in my opinion, unconstitutional to force people to buy something they don't want or punish them if they don't. My feelings about obamacare, and I suspect they are the same for many republicans in congress, is not joy at obama failing, it is trying to save the country from disastrous legislation.

I will not say it never happens on the right. That would be a lie. I can admit there are examples of the right behaving badly, even criminally on occasion. But I can't compare the few examples on the right with the seemingly daily examples from the left.

That having been said, we were talking about the behavior of the lefton a thread called "Liberal Vitriol". And once again it cant be discussed without a dose of whataboutism. Ok. I acknowledged your belief that the right is not perfect. Can we get back on topic now?

As with all things, it's complicated.

Here's what I think. It started with the first Clinton.

When the right went after Clinton, that was really the first time I noticed the politics of personal destruction becoming the norm. Then came the Bush/Gore election fiasco. That certainly unlocked the gates.

Then the Bush adminstration, with Cheney Vader and Rove, perfected the approach of governing by demonizing the opposition. Once Obama took office, things got a whole lot worse, because despite promising otherwise, he governed by doing the exact same thing- even more so- with the help of Pelosi and Reid...and finally, the MSM.

As the dysfunction of our government became more obvious in each of these administrations, tensions grew further- each side blaming the other for anything and everything.

Then came President Trump. I believed from day one he would win if the left picked HRC. If Bernie had been the nominee, he would have been President. But I digress. Either way, all hell was going to break loose with any of the candidates in the pool this last cycle.

But what really pushed things over the edge has been the media. I believe a free press is vital to an open and free society. But we do not really have that. What we have is a handful of corporations pushing out product masquerading as journalism. They have fueled the fire. In an effort to compete with the blogging world, they have become nothing more than bloggers themselves, loose with facts and heavy with agenda... and always painting everything into extremes.

There was a time journalism reported on both sides of an issue with at least a vaneer of neutrality and reporting 'facts' not largely in dispute.

No longer. The media is in full swing of choosing sides. The politics of personal destruction is now how it's done and all with the full help of the media.

I'm not sure there is any coming back from that.

What remains to be seen is how damaging will the consequences be? The early indications don't look promising.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

You could say the same about the left as you say about Rush. Its not that they want America to fail - its that they want Trump to fail at what he tries to do, because they believe its the end of our country if he succeeds.

Regarding vitriol, it WAS daily from the right when Obama was in office, especially in the first couple of years.

a reply to: loam

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I believe the endgame is the rise of a totalitarian government in the US by making people lose faith on the Republic and believe the only way to restore order is by the iron fist of a dictator.

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Greven

I don't think you are dumb. That means you are intentionally being disingenuous. You know that it requires 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation, yet you pretend that isn't reality.

As bad as you feel now, prepare for things to get worse. The liberal movements reach has exceeded its grasp, and there will be a centrist backlash.

Moderate democrats are leaving the party.

Are you aware that the Senate voted for tax reform legislation?
Said tax legislation had a soft repeal of Obamacare, something Democrats vowed to filibuster.

Said vote had 49 opposition votes and 51 votes in favor.

How do you suppose that passed if:

it requires 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation

I live in the reality where this happened. Where do you live?

a reply to: starwarsisreal

I'm not convinced this is the result of some 'plan', but it certainly could be the consequence.

a reply to: Mach2

A) My paranoid ramblings?!??

I’m the skeptic...lol.


I’m the one saying there is not some vast leftist illuminati hell bent on taking all the guns and whatever else nonsense Sean Hannity is spouting this week..

B) And that’s why I think he did it.. because it doesn’t take a supervillian to have done it.

All the ridiculous hillary/obama conspiracies require a super villian.. they can’t even think of a profit based reason anyone would do it so they have to deflect and claim it is for “control”. Lol


It’s a Saturday morning cartoon...

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Right. One would think it would have exactly the opposite effect.

Lol, I guess this is the latest rwnj talking point? Hmmm, let me think. Have I ever met a rwnj that actually had an original thought.... nope I can come with one... a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

a reply to: loam

Excellent summary!!

That's a damn fine and lucid analysis!