Has Bush united or divided the country ?

Quote:

Concentrate on a job or career that you like, plus your family, and you will be surprised at how your anger, fear, and hatred of Republicans will subside.

Now that I think about it, though, your post pisses me off. This part in particular. Why?

Here's why:

Quote:

But Then It Was Too Late

"What no one seemed to notice," said a colleague of mine, a philologist, "was the ever widening gap, after 1933,between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany. And it became always wider. You know it doesn't make people close to their government to be told that this is a people's government, a true democracy, or to be enrolled in civilian defense, or even to vote. All this has little, really nothing to do with knowing one is governing.

What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

"This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

"You will understand me when I say that my Middle High German was my life. It was all I cared about. I was a scholar, a specialist. Then, suddenly, I was plunged into all the new activity, as the universe was drawn into the new situation; meetings, conferences, interviews, ceremonies, and, above all, papers to be filled out, reports, bibliographies, lists, questionnaires. And on top of that were the demands in the community, the things in which one had to, was "expected to" participate that had not been there or had not been important before. It was all rigmarole, of course, but it consumed all one's energies, coming on top of the work one really wanted to do. You can see how easy it was, then, not to think about fundamental things. One had no time."

"Those," I said, "are the words of my friend the baker. "One had no time to think. There was so much going on." "Your friend the baker was right," said my colleague. "The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your "little men", your baker and so on; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, mind you. Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about - we were decent people - and kept us so busy with continuous changes and "crises" and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the "national enemies", without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Unconsciously, I suppose, we were grateful. Who wants to think?

"To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it - please try to believe me - unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, "regretted," that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these "little measures" that no "patriotic German" could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.

http://www.thirdreich.net/Thought_They_Were_Free.html

This is what you are trying to get people to do by saying 'don't focus on politics, focus on your own life.' It is one of the most UnAmerican sentiments I have ever heard expressed on A2K. I'm sure you would be much happier if every Liberal would just ignore the thugs in the WH, but I'll be damned if I will.

Let's see if these phrases sound familiar to the modern-day situation:

Quote:

What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

Secret decisions? National Security being used to scare people into unifying behind a leader? Cult of Personality and 'trust me' being the answers given?

And you want me to just shut up and focus on my career?

Screw that.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

This is what you are trying to get people to do by saying 'don't focus on politics, focus on your own life.' It is one of the most UnAmerican sentiments I have ever heard expressed on A2K.

Exactly.

0 Replies

It's inconceivable the lengths some will go to make comparisons between Bush and Hitler.

0 Replies

It's inconceivable the lengths some will go to justify whatever Bush does.

0 Replies

I don't think Bush has divided this country (The US of A) I think Bush is president of a divided country.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

It's inconceivable the lengths some will go to make comparisons between Bush and Hitler.

IMHO, that's not what Cyc did. What he did was pointing out that the mindset of "don't focus on politics, focus on your own life" could lead to disastrous results.

0 Replies

Quote:

It's inconceivable the lengths some will go to make comparisons between Bush and Hitler.

Who did that? Thanks for playing.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The truth is, you don't know anything about me, other than the fact that I destroyed your argument. So why presume to judge?

You destroyed my argument in your opinion. Not in my opinion and likely obviously not in millions of other American's opinions if they were to review this forum. I answered your points and dispelled your accusations with logic.

Now, as to where and how you've come by this tremendous hatred, suspicion, and disagreement with Republicans, I am curious. I do not understand it or relate to it at all. Did your parents teach you this, did you develop it in school, college, or from your immediate family? Or do you claim to have concluded these things altogether on your own by reading, studying, whatever?

You need to understand that I and millions of others have a similar distrust for the liberal agenda. We believe it is truly the dangerous mindset. I have many reasons going back a long, long time to believe the way I do, but won't go into it now.

I and other Americans are offended by leftists and Democrats making the accusations against Bush. I do not worship at Bush's feet. I don't even agree with many of his policies. He is only a man with imperfections, however, I believe he is doing his level best to do a good job, and in no way is he a phony, which is what I've concluded with many Democrats. I do not like, nor do I respect phony politicians, and there are plenty of them. I may not agree with Bush and Cheney all the time, but I do respect them. I cannot say the same for the Clintons, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Howard Dean. The Democrats need somebody that is honest and that will articulate their honest opinions. Lieberman is close, but all can see the Democrats are trying to even shove him aside.

The "Bush is a liar" mantra, using the "no WMD" mantra is a classic. When more information comes forth proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Hussein was involved with it right up to the war, and not only that, but was involved with terrorists, will the Democrats, and will people like you have enough character, enough honor, to admit it? That is only one of many things that have been twisted and lied about in the media so long that it is astounding.

You and others prefer to play down terrorism as not much threat, and you further liken patriotism and the desire to protect ourselves to that of Germany and Hitler drumming up a fervor for war. You see, I think the situation is more accurately likened to the fact that the terrorists are the threat similar to Hitler, and some people, some countries wanted to negotiate and turn a blind eye to Hitler until the problem was out of control and millions were slaughtered. Same situation now, many wish to turn a blind eye toward terrorists, pretend it isn't that bad, and simply think lets treat them nice and negotiate with them and the problem will go away. People like yourself are living in denial of the problem.

dyslexia wrote:

I don't think Bush has divided this country (The US of A) I think Bush is president of a divided country.

I agree with you. I don't think it matters a bit who the person is. If the person is a Republican president, he will be treated the same way by Democrats. The country does seem to be divided, which is an interesting subject in itself.

0 Replies

Even if I did consider terrorism to be a threat comprable to hitler (I don't; that's an idiotic statement), I still wouldn't believe that attacking countries with military force, who had nothing to do with Al Qaeda's attacking us on 9/11, isn't the right way to go about solving the problem.

Quote:

Now, as to where and how you've come by this tremendous hatred, suspicion, and disagreement with Republicans, I am curious. I do not understand it or relate to it at all. Did your parents teach you this, did you develop it in school, college, or from your immediate family? Or do you claim to have concluded these things altogether on your own by reading, studying, whatever?

Since you asked, I'll tell you.

I'm 26 years old. I come from a primarily Republican family; growing up in Houston in the 80's and 90's reinforced this, as most of my friends and their families were also Republican.

And I stayed that way, even through most of my college here in Austin, Tx; a very liberal place. I used to remember seeing Reagan on TV as a kid and knowing how much my parents liked and respected him; I remember when George W. Bush was elected governor of Texas over Ann Richards (who is now officially a vampire) and cheered it.

I remember when Bush got elected president the first time, too. I voted for him; I didn't know much about him or any politics really, but it was my first election, and I wanted to participate. It was pretty crazy when he didn't get elected for 6 weeks or so, but we were happy when he did.

I can remember telling my hippie friends who didn't like him that he did 'pretty well' for his first 100 days. When 9/11 happened, I was floored as everyone else was and also suffered a lot of personal worry due to relatives who lived in NYC at the time. I applauded Bush's response and I applauded attacking Afghanistan - hell, they came out and said 'yeah, we did it bitches!' They obviously had to go.

But then, when people started talking about an imminent attack on Iraq, I couldn't understand why. After 9/11, I started doing a lot more reading about politics online. And I didn't like what I read. Not in a conspiracy-theory way, but in a 'pay attention to your government and you'll find out things you don't like' kind of way. Corruption, lobbying, the money aspect of it.

And I remember thinking, why is this happening? Why aren't they focusing all their energy on Al Qaeda? Iraq didn't attack us. I didn't like what was happening. I read about how money was diverted from the Afghanistan war to plan the war in Iraq... and it turns out to be true.

The more research I did, the more I was disgusted with myself for having been a supporter of some of these guys. I read about the PNAC. I read about Richard Clarke. I read about UN weapons inspectors who couldn't find anything.

And I remember, I remember exactly what the administration was saying. They said "WMD, WMD, WMD, freedom, WMD, WMD, Uranium, WMD, etc." They brought up the danger of Iraq constantly and consistently.

I remember reading about how these same people wanted to attack Iraq years before Bush even came into office.

I remember thinking about how they got exactly the chance they needed.

I remember the atmosphere of the time; it was like Osama Bin Laden had been completely forgotten about. The press was all 'shocked and awe' about the war.

I remember deciding to stop taking for granted that Republicans were telling the truth, like I had my whole life; and it turns out it was a good idea.

I was wilfully blind! But no longer. That was three years ago, and I have had nothing but confirmation of my decision as the correct one since then.

You mistake me, sir; I don't hate Republicans. When I think of a Republican, I think of my dad; a smart, conservative guy who wants to pay low taxes and be left alone to run his life as much as possible. A regular guy.

But the group in right now? They are Republican, because the Party has put them at the top; but they are so far away from what it means to be Conservative, or Republican, as to sully the name.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I am going to assume you speak the truth about your evolution of thought. One question, how come the corruption by Democrats doesn't seem to bother you? I would suggest we both admit that some politicians are corrupt in both parties, but I am never going to buy the line that one party is the party of corruption now. I've seen too much in the previous administration to believe that. We need to rise above naivity here concerning politics.

To try to summarize or extract from your essay the most important thing that apparently turned you was our war in Iraq. I will admit to trepidations about it leading up to the war, and based on all the information known, I ultimately came down on the side of the administration. I and a friend carried on a heated debate for weeks concerning this, with him on the non-war side. I respect him for it because he was consistent. Ultimately, my assessment was that Hussein was a dangerous player and needed to be taken out for a number of reasons.

What if further information comes forth that Hussein was indeed plotting with terrorists and involved with WMD leading up to the war? Would you change your mind?

If people legitimately oppose the war for honest reasons based on accurate information, and are consistent, then that is to be honored. What I don't want to see are people and politicians sticking their fingers in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. We've seen alot of that. What we need is honesty and consistency throughout. The Congress had the same information as Bush, and gave full authorization for the actions taken, and should not now be backstabbing for purely political purposes.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I don't think Bush has divided this country (The US of A) I think Bush is president of a divided country.

Do you think it was this partisan and this sharply divided before his administration took over??

Anon

0 Replies

So far, 1 vote fpr uniter. Of course, that has to be Brandon who is just totally smitten with our C-I-C.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

So far, 1 vote fpr uniter. Of course, that has to be Brandon who is just totally smitten with our C-I-C.

That's about the usual accuracy of your deductions. I didn't vote.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Roxxxanne wrote:
So far, 1 vote fpr uniter. Of course, that has to be Brandon who is just totally smitten with our C-I-C.

That's about the usual accuracy of your deductions. I didn't vote.

So, if you had, what would you have done, filibuster?

0 Replies

Anon-Voter wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
I don't think Bush has divided this country (The US of A) I think Bush is president of a divided country.

Do you think it was this partisan and this sharply divided before his administration took over??

Anon

I think its been progressing over a period of years. I think the Clinton administration did more to divide the country than anything. Republicans and conservatives had no respect for the administration because of rampant corruption and problems, yet Democrats insisted on defending their precious party at the expense of throwing principles to the wind. Republicans and conservatives have not forgotten this. Then the Florida election battle didn't help. With Bush winning, Democrats somehow decided to use corruption as a method to undermine their opponents when they lost the Whitehouse, in order to take it back. I think they actually believed that turn about is fair play so they have attempted to dig up dirt in the most frantic manner ever since. I think the unspoken philosophy is that of all politics is corrupt, so they intend to use the Republican's tactics on the Republicans. What the Democrats fail to understand is that people are not that stupid. You need actual, factual, significant corruption that is unique to Republicans in order to make that strategy work. So all of these accusations and bitter fighting between parties continues to increase the rancor and distrust between the parties.

I think politics is merely a reflection of what is happening in society. Society itself is undergoing a cultural battle, which expresses itself in communities, schools, churches, and other institutions across the country.

0 Replies

Exactly Okie, we need another Nixon/Agnew to bring us all back together, again.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Republicans and conservatives had no respect for the administration because of rampant corruption and problems, yet Democrats insisted on defending their precious party at the expense of throwing principles to the wind. Republicans and conservatives have not forgotten this.

No, apparently not. They appear to have learned from their predecessors' example.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

Exactly Okie, we need another Nixon/Agnew to bring us all back together, again.

I keep pinching myself to make sure this just isn't a horrible nightmare.

Anon

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

okie wrote:
Republicans and conservatives had no respect for the administration because of rampant corruption and problems, yet Democrats insisted on defending their precious party at the expense of throwing principles to the wind. Republicans and conservatives have not forgotten this.

No, apparently not. They appear to have learned from their predecessors' example.

90% of our problems today can be traced directly back to the Reagan/Bush, Bush/Quail (oops) Administrations!

Anon

0 Replies

Actually, I think theres always been a competition, which is healthy, but perhaps the Vietnam War era and Watergate were the watershed events that have led to today's situation. The baby boomers, particularly baby boomer demcrats have rejected the traditional values of the generation of their parents, and these people have taken over the parties of today, and the rejection of traditional values is most markedly seen within the leadership of the Democratic Party.

0 Replies

Has Bush united or divided the country ?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know