You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is It Okay To *Hate* A Politician? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 11:19 AM
Original message
Is It Okay To *Hate* A Politician?
Advertisements [?]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/is-it-okay-to-hate-a-poli_b_85650.html


I know we're not supposed to use the word "hate" when talking about politicians. We're supposed to say we "dislike" their policies or even their tactics. We "disagree" with their positions and find their strategy "troublesome" and a "cause for concern."

The problem is I hate Mitt Romney. I don't just dislike him as a politician. I dislike him as a person.

Now you see, I'm not supposed to say that. That makes me sound angry and it's not allowed in the mainstream. On the other hand, of course, Mitt Romney can say anything he likes about us.

For example, today at CPAC, Romney said that if the Democrats won the election we would "surrender" to the terrorists. That's apparently perfectly acceptable thing to say. But I can't tell you what I really think of Mitt Romney.

First of all, I'd like to point out that his revered president never caught Osama bin Laden and said he was "not that concerned about him" (an idea Romney echoed at one point in the campaign). Can we call that surrendering? If Bush has given up trying, is there another word for it?

Of course, President Bush on Friday will say nearly the same thing at CPAC. He will say that our "prosperity and peace" will be jeopardized if we elect a Democrat. But we're supposed to respect this guy?

Remember this is a guy who got hundreds of thousands of people killed because he thought he was a messianic cowboy. His craven indifference to the lives of others cannot be mentioned in polite company. The fact that he is clearly a very, very stupid man is not a nice thing to say (watch Fred Kaplan of Slate and I debate this point here). And we are certainly not allowed to say that we hate him for getting all these people killed, for muddying the name of America, for authorizing torture and taking away our fundamental freedoms. No, that would be impolite and we can't have it.

Is what he did polite? Is his implication that Democrats are weak and would give in to the terrorists polite? Why are they allowed to be complete and utter assholes, but we're not allowed to call them out on it?

In the same CPAC speech, Romney implied that he was only in the race because America needed him. Please!!! Who doesn't hate this guy?

Remember this golden oldie below? Watch Mitt Romney pandering to the voters of Massachusetts when he was trying to prove he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy. As you watch him talk about abortion, remember that he switched positions and is now for imposing his personal beliefs on others...(For the rest, please click the Huffington Post link at the top of the page)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC