Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Wow, where is all the hatred coming from?

Old 11-03-04, 11:12 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,513
Wow, where is all the hatred coming from?

A few of my friends who voted for Kerry are just fuming, and probably won't talk to me for some time. Why all the hatred towards a fellow American who is in office? Why all the hatred towards me, who has the right to vote for who he wants?

I didn't like Clinton, but I sure as hell respected him as a human being, even though I disagreed with his actions. I've been hearing everything from voter fraud to preventing people from voting in some states, to a lack of the democratic political process working...and I really don't get this last argument because well, a record number of voters...voted.

It almost seems like the Dems and Reps are becoming more like Shi'ite and Sunni political parties.
DVD Polizei is online now  
Old 11-03-04, 11:15 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
By John Kass
Chicago Tribune

Can't we all just get along now? Not likely


Published November 3, 2004

After half the country spent the last four years sticking it to the other half, I asked myself this question Tuesday night:

Would we still respect each other in the morning?

I wish it were true, sort of. You probably wish it were true, too, sort of. The answer is, no.

Whether the presidential election was decided late, or whether lawyers jawbone for days, I don't know if getting along politically is possible anymore. You probably don't want to consider this, but the mid-term election campaigns are now officially under way.

We've stopped talking to each other. Discourse is a dinosaur. We separate into our camps, turn to writers and networks and Web pages that reflect our sensibilities, the market fragmenting along with any sense of common understanding.

But it would be nice if we could be civil with each other. It's difficult to imagine being civil now, with angry voices still yammering on into Wednesday.

Listening to WLS-AM just before I voted, liberal host Jay Marvin joked to conservative co-host Eileen Burns that on Election Day, their station should be called WGOP.

One caller wasn't amused and was fearful that Sen. John Kerry would defeat President Bush.

"If Kerry wins," the caller snarled at Jay, identifying himself anonymously as a Vietnam veteran, "I'm going to call my congressman and tell him to fight Kerry every step of the way, the way the Democrats did to President Bush."

Marvin said that if Kerry won, he'd be entitled to the same respect that Bush received. The anti-Kerry fellow thought so, too, and that's the problem.

"He might be your president, but he ain't gonna be mine," the caller said.

That's how it was in 2000 for Democrats who felt they had been robbed of the presidency. And that's how it will be after this one, regardless of the outcome. Once we asked the lawyers and courts to decide a national election, the legitimacy of the process was forever in question.

When I talk about being civil, I'm not suggesting you should sing "Kum By Ya" to the opposition. And I'm not saying you should take it easy on politicians or writers who have opinions. I'll plead guilty to misdemeanor aggravation, though some of you insist I should be convicted of felony insinuation.

That's fine. I'm all for a good argument. The alternative is a silence too terrible to contemplate, unless you're in Chicago, where the silence is general.

What bothers me is the animosity folks show to each other, to neighbors and friends. We've broken into tribes and, instead of clubs, we use words. In the old country, there's a saying: The human tongue has no bones, yet it can break bones.

The person you disagree with on political matters, neighbor or spouse or friend, isn't by nature evil, festering slime. She isn't a liar. He isn't a phony. They're not cowards, or driven by genetics to be intellectually dishonest, or demons, or any of seven or so words you can't print.

Too many of us have forgotten that.

Of all the issues we'll bicker about next, one will definitely get the blood pressure up: The next president will be expected to make appointments to the Supreme Court.

If we can't agree on what to do in Iraq, wait until the Senate Judiciary hearings consider a nominee to replace Chief Justice William Rehnquist, if cancer forces him to resign.

I was thinking about this Tuesday night as the cable networks began a strange dance, first interviewing politicians who spoke abstractly of healing a nation they helped divide. Then TV anchors began calling the states for Kerry and Bush.

CNN's Wolf Blitzer was so breathless, shouting so loudly that his voice echoed in the studio, that the Washington Post's Bob Woodward suggested that all TV guys take a pill and relax.

And what of folks in their homes, smiling or screaming at the TV, flipping to favorite networks. The Kerry voters switching to CBS, NBC, ABC or CNN. The Bush voters basked in the reflective glow of FOX News. Some must have been nervously sticking pins into their Dan Rather voodoo dolls.

What's divided us into tribes isn't the war or the economy alone. It is social policy that molds the American culture. It is about a sense of morality, once commonly held, and the desperate effort to redefine it or restore it.

Many in my business dismiss this as vulgar, as the distracting "culture wars." But folks who vote, folks on all sides, don't see it that way. They see it as vitally important.

We're divided on same-sex marriage, abortion, stem-cell research--a proxy for abortion--and so on.

We can't even agree on how to begin to decide these issues, whether through the state legislatures as expression of popular will, or through the federal courts as the expression of the elites who appointed the judges.

Until these are decided, the tribalism won't stop.
chanster is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:19 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Willow Grove, PA
Posts: 3,055
LOL - i am a teacher, people were super, super depressed.... since they should be happy, first election in 12 years where the winner had over 50% of the popular vote!
Sloth911 is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:26 PM
  #4  
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 754
Cananada.
Verbal Gorilla is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:29 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 9,975
Well, looking at the posts made by eX and myself, I think we're some of the few not being totally run by our emotions.
BizRodian is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:30 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Re: Wow, where is all the hatred coming from?

Originally posted by DVD Polizei
A few of my friends who voted for Kerry are just fuming, and probably won't talk to me for some time. Why all the hatred towards a fellow American who is in office?
First, remind your friends that you have one vote. Even in "Too Close To Call" Ohio, the nailbiter margin was 135,000 votes. Holding any one vote against any one voter shows an aburd ignorance of mathematics.

Now, to answer your question: Bush has built his platform on dogged pursuit of one side's agenda and an insulting disregard for the arguments of the other side. There was no debate before his ban on stem-cell research funding; he just decreed it. There was no interaction with the public over gay marriage; he just pushed for a constitutional amendment.

This is not how a president who represents "the American people" acts, but this is his style. So when he gets reelected, it shows that 51% of America agrees that the other 49% of America should be ignored.

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:36 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
You can't go about your life believing Bush was an illegitimate president, stole an election, is a moran, looks like a monkey, is the anti-christ for four years, and somehow more than half of the people wanted to keep him, and not still be angry.

This was the one reason I looked forward to Kerry winning. Four more years of whining.

Who was the last famous person to threaten to leave if liberal won?
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:38 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
There was no interaction with the public over gay marriage; he just pushed for a constitutional amendment.
Are you kidding me? Thats the way people in the government interacts with the people. They propose things, the public debate goes on, then the the Congress debates, then they vote. Good grief.

e. There was no debate before his ban on stem-cell research funding
Yes. Just like how Clinton and every other president issues executive orders, see Clinton's decree about motorized vehicles in national parks. Finally, after 10 years, people are starting to have discussions about it.
chanster is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:46 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by chanster
Are you kidding me? Thats the way people in the government interacts with the people. They propose things, the public debate goes on, then the the Congress debates, then they vote. Good grief.
Consider the buildup to Iraq - that was true interaction with the public. The entire administration made the case, over and over again, for their views - on Crossfire, on Meet The Press, in public addresses. This lasted for a year, and it regarded an invasion that, while historic, is just a short-term blip. They were dead wrong, of course, but at least they presented their wrong-headed views to the public in the correct manner.

Now consider the proposed constitutional amendment for banning gay marriage. In contrast with Iraq, this is about <i>amending the Constitution,</i> about permanently altering the very fabric of our law and society. And yet, the president did not try to convince the public that this was the right thing for the country. He just said, "This is what I believe, and this is how it's going to be done." Very curt - practically no discussion - just a presidential fiat.
Originally posted by chanster
Yes. Just like how Clinton and every other president issues executive orders, see Clinton's decree about motorized vehicles in national parks.
Let me get this straight: You're comparing a decision to abandon an enormous and promising swath of medical therapies, due to some mumbled religious notions, with "the use of motorized vehicles in national parks?"

- David Stein

Last edited by sfsdfd; 11-03-04 at 11:50 PM.
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:52 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,513
David,

But remember this was in response to San Francisco going cosmic on gay marriages, openly defying social laws and asking for an authority to respond--that's what they wanted. I don't understand the problem people have with this. You ask for attention, you will get it--especially with a president in an election year who is conservative. It's a big "DUH" in my book.

Bush didn't just create a law all by himself--he only told Congress he wanted them to creat an amendment "defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife."

Now realistically, how could this pass with the necessary majority needed? The Democrats just made this a bigger reality by losing even more seats in the Senate and House. I just can't believe the kind of mentality I see here. Many presidents have made their own "suggestions" regarding social behavior. Whether or not it actually becomes valid, is the 2/3 vote in house and senate, and ratification by 3/4 of the states.
DVD Polizei is online now  
Old 11-03-04, 11:52 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Norman, OK
Posts: 2,523
I have to admit, I was a little devastated by the results from yesterday...it gulls me that people actually look at George Bush and think, "hmm...good president, I think I'll vote for him since he's done such a great job"

what are people thinking?
JMLEWIS1 is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:58 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 3,068
Originally posted by JMLEWIS1
I have to admit, I was a little devastated by the results from yesterday...it gulls me that people actually look at George Bush and think, "hmm...good president, I think I'll vote for him since he's done such a great job"

what are people thinking?
yes you're smart, they're stupid. well done.

This is why the democrats are losing power, too many refuse to see ANY good in the opposition.

birrman54
Birrman54 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:02 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,513
JMLEWIS1,

I think a large portion of those who voted for Bush, wanted him to take full responsibility for everything going on in Iraq. It would be way too easy for BOTH presidents to blame each other if Kerry was voted into office. It's happened before so many times.
DVD Polizei is online now  
Old 11-04-04, 12:03 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Norman, OK
Posts: 2,523
Originally posted by Birrman54
yes you're smart, they're stupid. well done.

This is why the democrats are losing power, too many refuse to see ANY good in the opposition.

birrman54
I do not have anything against republicans...it's just that THIS republican is not worthy of this position
JMLEWIS1 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:06 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Now consider the proposed constitutional amendment for banning gay marriage. In contrast with Iraq, this is about amending the Constitution, about permanently altering the very fabric of our law and society. And yet, the president did not try to convince the public that this was the right thing for the country. He just said, "This is what I believe, and this is how it's going to be done." Very curt - practically no discussion - just a presidential fiat.
Has this bill passed? Is it law of the nation? No its not. Its got a hell of a long way to go, plenty of opportunity for debate. You make it sound like this issue is resolved. In reality, its not even close to becoming law. In fact, it sounds like something Bush proposed to keep his base happy but really has no intention of putting much effort behind it.

Let me get this straight: You're comparing a decision to abandon an enormous and promising swath of medical therapies, due to some mumbled religious notions, with "the use of motorized vehicles in national parks?"
Yes! Because it affects a lot of people in the Western states, which is something that people in New York don't seem to understand. And you know for a fact that isn't abandoning any thing.
chanster is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:10 AM
  #16  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Originally posted by sfsdfd

Let me get this straight: You're comparing a decision to abandon an enormous and promising swath of medical therapies, due to some mumbled religious notions, with "the use of motorized vehicles in national parks?"

- David Stein
OT: Did Bush somehow make it illegal? Can't private companies do all they want? Aren't they?
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:10 AM
  #17  
DVD Talk Godfather
Thread Starter
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,513
chanster hit it on the head. I think Bush went through the moves and knew darn well it wouldn't actually change anything, but did it just to appease his extremist minority crowd. Well, they sure took the bait this election.
DVD Polizei is online now  
Old 11-04-04, 12:16 AM
  #18  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The land of chocolate
Posts: 6,617
Originally posted by JMLEWIS1
I have to admit, I was a little devastated by the results from yesterday...it gulls me that people actually look at George Bush and think, "hmm...good president, I think I'll vote for him since he's done such a great job"

what are people thinking?
Probably "I'll vote for him since he's done such a great job".

That's the beauty of democracy. We all think and believe different things. Personally I'm far from being a big fan of most of Bush's decisions and while I'm not alone in my thinking, other people DO disagree with me and think he's the best thing since sliced bread.

While I think invading Iraq was a HUGE mistake, other people think it's good. Whether they truly believe that or they've been sold that is something that's different to each individual.

I think a blanket ban on gay marriage at a Federal level is wrong and that a Federal Government has no place in dictating morality. Other people think it's appropriate...even desirable.

Different strokes really. Not a lot I can do about it. *shrug*
naughty jonny is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:20 AM
  #19  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Originally posted by JMLEWIS1
I have to admit, I was a little devastated by the results from yesterday...it gulls me that people actually look at George Bush and think, "hmm...good president, I think I'll vote for him since he's done such a great job"

what are people thinking?
And the inspiration for a new sig. Not your post, but the sentiment.
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:21 AM
  #20  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
GreenMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,380
Whether or not it actually becomes valid, is the 2/3 vote in house and senate, and ratification by 3/4 of the states.
And how likely is it to happen? I thought no, but American voters proved me wrong yesterday. It appears that 3/4 of the states would vote it down. Hell, we're a blue northern Dem state (barely) and we voted to ban both marriage and civil unions 59% to 41%. Look at all the red states on the map for Bush. If a blue democratic state will pass it, I doubt it would get many problems in the red states.

A little research shows that the vote failed by 19 votes in the Senate (6 R's and a few dems voting against). And with it obvious that voters support it, how many politicians will side with them?

It looks possible to me. Scary to see something like that put into the constitution.
GreenMonkey is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:24 AM
  #21  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by DVD Polizei
But remember this was in response to San Francisco going cosmic on gay marriages, openly defying social laws and asking for an authority to respond--that's what they wanted. I don't understand the problem people have with this. You ask for attention, you will get it--especially with a president in an election year who is conservative.
I agree that it was ill-considered.

But I also believe that the issue is not an equivalent, two-way street. You don't have a law stating "Society shalt do A," and a discrete set of individuals saying, "We believe that society should do B, so we're just going to do it, to the detriment of everyone else."

In this case, you have one small group of people that wanted to do something that 95% of society already does. The measure was largely symbolic, and the impact on the rest of society was trivial bordering on indiscernible. And yet, you have an enormous countermovement to stop them from doing that. Why? Because (mumble mumble) man and a woman (mumble mumble) just ain't natural.

It's a dark day for democracy when our nation makes a concerted effort to deprive a tiny subset of its citizens some rights given to the whole, when the differential cost of equality is negligible.

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:29 AM
  #22  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
The measure was largely symbolic, and the impact on the rest of society was trivial bordering on indiscernible. And yet, you have an enormous countermovement to stop them from doing that. Why? Because (mumble mumble) man and a woman (mumble mumble) just ain't natural.
When will come to understand that some people don't view it as trivial? Thats all your opinion there. Other people have different opinions.
chanster is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:31 AM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by kvrdave
OT: Did Bush somehow make it illegal? Can't private companies do all they want? Aren't they?
This is early-stage technology that will take many billions of dollars before the first conceivable therapy is proposed. Then it will take many millions of dollars to get each therapy fully tested, FDA approved, and commercialized.

No company can realistically afford to fund technology that's a decade or more away from available therapies. This technology will truly revolutionize medicine - but it needs an enormous amount of funding to get it there. That task is <i>always</i> borne by the federal government - only now, they're not.

Think about genetics: We've done amazing work in this field for about four decades, and yet only now are we starting to see the first results, in terms of diagnostic and prognostic markers. We still aren't anywhere near gene replacement therapy - which, again, will revolutionize medicine, but which needs a ton more funding.

Now, imagine if the government had declined to fund the Human Genome Project because "that would be 'playing God'" or some other cloudy-brain religious bullshit. That effectively kills the entire research pipeline.

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:35 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,062
Originally posted by chanster
When will come to understand that some people don't view it as trivial? Thats all your opinion there. Other people have different opinions.
I have asked (as have others) why this is, or to come up with any secular reason, and no one has come with an answer. I am close to this particular issue and thus have no objectivity, but I am tired of affording the anti-gay marriage viewpoint the benefit of the doubt. The opponents of gay marriage are bigoted. It's no long acceptable (well, sort of) to announce anti-gay prejudice, so we get this side-angle representation of it.

Last edited by TracerBullet; 11-04-04 at 12:37 AM.
Tracer Bullet is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:35 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Originally posted by GreenMonkey
And how likely is it to happen? I thought no, but American voters proved me wrong yesterday. It appears that 3/4 of the states would vote it down. Hell, we're a blue northern Dem state (barely) and we voted to ban both marriage and civil unions 59% to 41%. Look at all the red states on the map for Bush. If a blue democratic state will pass it, I doubt it would get many problems in the red states.

A little research shows that the vote failed by 19 votes in the Senate (6 R's and a few dems voting against). And with it obvious that voters support it, how many politicians will side with them?

It looks possible to me. Scary to see something like that put into the constitution.
I agree. I hope that because of all the states that have taken it on that they will drop the ammendment idea. It would also be nice if the state courts would leave it up to the legislature and if the Supreme Court would leave it up to the states. This would make it more "palatable" to change within the states as time goes on, assuming that opinions change.

I know many here didn't agree with me on this, but I thought it was a mistake to push it like it was. I think elected officials breaking the law, etc. only hurt the case in this election. I think that courts that forced changed also made more of a backlash against it.

No one likes to fight slow, but I think those actions probably added at least a decade to the cause.
kvrdave is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.