Are teabaggers as alienated from Obama as DU was alienated from Bush?

[BurtWorm]

I get the very strong sense that teabaggers cannot compute that Obama is President of the United States. It even seems that they are becoming more alienated as time goes on--that is, most of them apparently accepted that the eletion was legitimate--except for the bircher/birthers among them--but they've been whipped up into such a hysterical frenzy that they may be irretrievably over the edge.

In my lifetime, I've been alienated from Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and both Bushes, but it was really only the last one whose legitimacy I refused to accept from day one. And for damn good reason!! Nixon, Reagan and Bush I disgusted me (Ford was not quite so repulsive for some reason--probably because he seemed to be a loaner/placeholder president), but even at their most disgusting, I was never so alienated from them that I thought the nation was about to collapse. I ahd that strong sense during Bush II, and now it looks as though the teabaggers are feeling the same thing with Obama.

The key difference between them and me (at least) though is that their party is encouraging them to feel this way. They show up at their Reps. town halls calling Obama Hitler or Stalin, and the Rep. gives them a big smooch on the ass. We had to find out on our own what an illegitimate fraud Bush was; the media and even leaders of our own party lied to us about his legitimacy. These people have Fox News massaging their worst (illegitimate) fears about Obama 24/7.

So are these people more alienated, less alienated, as alienated?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. More alienated and a lot more racist than anything else

Really, when you think about it, race is the only thing that the GOP can "pin" on Obama--he's not having affairs, he's working hard, hasn't made any great gaffes in the public forum.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. More, I think.

It is their fundamental and intractable racism, I think, that makes them refuse to accept him. They want to delegitimize him somehow (that's the basis of all the birther crap) because they can't stand it that a black guy got to be President.

Liberals detested Bush for a lot of good reasons, not the least of which was the way he got "elected" both times. But we hated him for what he did, not for what he was.

[DCKit]

19. "But we hated him for what he did, not for what he was."

I respectfully disagree.

We experienced revulsion at his willful and wide ranging ignorance on every possible topic, for being an abject failure at every endeavor he undertook, the fact that he was a wholly owned subsidiary of multi-national corporations and his fascist ideals. Unamerican doesn't begin to describe the package that is BushCo*.

What he did was bad enough to inspire the international community to hatred, what he demonstrated himself to BE has inspired the violent, angry, willfully ignorant and authoritarian movement we are seeing now, right here at home.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

23. I guess by "what he was" I was alluding more to his race and other

inborn characteristics. He was an upper-class white guy, like most presidents before him. I didn't hate him for that, though. But if you consider "what he was" to also mean an arrogant, willfully ignorant, narcissistic asshole, then yes; I did detest him for what he was.

[DCKit]

25. I'm sooooo going into politics. n/t

[BurtWorm]

28. I thought you put it well. I think you made a good point.

These people hate Obama because he's black. They say it's because he's a socialist (which of course he isn't). Or because he's trying to establish himself as a dictator (which of course he isn't).

Bush-Cheney on the other hand, clearly was trying to sap the power of the other branches and do as much right-wing damage to the government as they could in the time they could steal. Yes, Bush is a moronic upperclass twit, worthy of being hated for what he is. But it's what he did--beginning with the theft of election 2000--that earned him our lasting contempt.

[bunkerbuster1]

3. "We had to find out on our own what an illegitimate fraud Bush was"

Beautifully and succinctly put. I might have to steal that.

[Echo In Light]

7. It didn't help that so many Dems fought the FACT of election theft tooth and nail for yrs

[Blue_In_AK]

4. More alienated and much more dangerous.

I get the distinct feeling that many on that side, even elected officials, would be cheering if Obama were assassinated. We hated Bush, no doubt, but very few people wished him dead, at least not out loud.

[Poll_Blind]

5. What Blue_In_AK said. n/t

PB

[The Wielding Truth]

6. The difference is that we respect and wish democracy to work.

They are in a blind quest for personal power. They are led to support the unbridled corporate freedom of capitalism. It is a crock, but they are not allowed to see national unselfishness in a federal push as a good thing for it's people.

[Echo In Light]

17. +1

[Lilith Velkor]

26. You have it backwards, I think

It's not personal power they are after, it's power for some rich fuck who will screw them just as readily as they will everyone else.

I mean, come on. What could be more unselfish than voluntarily lowering one's own standard of living so that some defense contractor can get a second yacht?

[The Wielding Truth]

30. Yep.My point, however, was that they are selfish and afraid that

someone anyone will take something from them and they don't even know what. They are just so scared and so clueless. They are running themselves into walls.

[babylonsister]

8. We at least had multiple good reasons that stacked up daily for

about 8 years. They got nothin' but their hatred and ignorance.

[Hekate]

9. One of the biggest differences is the way they worship guns and threaten violence...

Political assassinations in this country come from the rightwing fringes, and the Republican Party has become so debased that it encourages the fringe and legitimates them.

Their threats of violence (whether it be from one of their radio and tv gods or from a yokel with a gun strapped to his thigh at a public forum) need to be taken seriously.

As far as I am concerned, that is the biggest difference between Us and Them.

Hekate

[Sebastian Doyle]

10. I'll openly admit despising Chimpy

I've never liked any of the Repuke Presidents in my lifetime (Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Poppy) but I allowed them the respect of the office because they were elected by the majority of the American people.

Chimpy was not. Not in 2000. Not in 2004. Not to mention he was simply too goddamn STUPID to occupy the office. (Not that Reagan was a genius by any means, but at least he could deliver a speech.) I never felt like I owed Half Assed Monkey Boy even the slightest grudging respect because he was a complete fraud.

Now I suppose that if the teabaggers actually believe the "born in Kenya" nonsense then they would say Obama was just as fraudulent. But I seriously question whether any of them truly BELIEVE that horseshit. It's pretty obvious that Oily Twatz is being propped up by some Likudist elements (she immediately took a trip to Israel after her failed media tour) and probably doesn't even believe her own bullshit.

The rest of it is probably just a bunch of racists who will never accept the reality of a Black man being their president.

[arcadian]

11. No, teabaggers are getting a lot of press.

No but posts like this legitimize Bush's Presidency.

[BurtWorm]

12. 'Posts like this legitimize Chimpy's presidency'?!

:wtf:

[arcadian]

13. Yeah, you're saying that the teabaggers have a legitimate gripe.

When the whole thing is astro-turf.

[BurtWorm]

20. You're reading it wrong, if that's what you think I was saying.

[arcadian]

22. Whether you intended it or not, that is what you are saying.

You're the one comparing DUers to teabaggers. You're also saying that our distaste for Bush is on the same par as the teabaggers distaste for Obama. When the two are incomparable, but thanks for doing the MSM's job for them.

[BurtWorm]

27. You're reading is impaired.

That's all I can tell you.

[Howardx]

14. our conspiracy theories about bush turned out to be true

thats the difference.

[Cerridwen]

15. At least. But, let's not do ourselves the disservice of trying to compare

the two in an attempt to be "fair and balanced."

I was alienated from shrub due to his activities in politics long before he was appointed to the White House. he used a whisper campaign to unseat a highly popular and immensely effective governor. he did not gain that position due to any merit on his part. he won only through lies and as much money as his friends and family could throw at him. he had a history of failed businesses, lackluster performance in school, and a mean streak a mile wide, to name just a few of his documented deficiencies. Hardly a role model or someone to look up to as President of the United States.

The teabaggers, however, are alienated from President Obama, not based on any factual evidence whatsoever, but based on rumor catapulted as fact that he was not born in the US, that he is a socialist/nazi/dictator/etc. with nothing, and I mean nothing but lies, to substantiate their assertions. they have not presented one statement that has not been disproved over and over, ad nauseum.

Trying to compare our sense of alienation to theirs in order to be "fair and balanced" is like 100 people looking up to see the clear blue sky and stopping to debate with one person who sees gathering storm clouds when there are none.

I wish we'd stop allowing lies the same amount of attention as fact. The two should not have equal weight and at least one of them needs to be exposed to the light of day.

[crim son]

16. I think it's about the same. Remember the "Sorry, World" website?

I know that I have never felt as miserable as an american citizen during the shrub's tenure and I know many, many people who felt the same. People genuinely considered leaving the U.S. But we Dems didn't express our misery with displays of rage and violence. What did I read recently, that Obama receives four times the number of death threats per day that Bush did... I think that says it all. Dem's despair during the shrub's administration was very real, but we dealt with it differently.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. No. They are violent. We were not.

As badly as we hated Bush, none of us carried a gun to his appearances, our preachers didn't wish Bush dead and none of us ever tried to kill him.

[renate]

24. yes, I think that's the main difference

We wanted Bush to be punished LEGALLY for his misdeeds (starting with stealing an election and going all the way up to starting a war without cause... sadly, even in our dreams there was never any legal recourse for his being an utter moron and a thoroughly unpleasant person). These people don't care how Obama would be removed--in fact, I'm pretty sure they would prefer it to be in a violent way. I think many of us hated Bush as much as the teabaggers hate Obama, but we were never EVIL about it--we wanted to get rid of him through the legal system, not outside of it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. I was at Camp Casey many times

We marched to the entrance of Bush's ranch. Many times. And never once did I know of anyone there who had a gun. Not once. The worst thing we did was hang IMPEACH signs on the fence surrounding his property.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

21. Much, much more alienated ---

because they have been purposely alienated from reality.

The thing that floors me is the sheer depth of ignorance on display from these people.

If you talked to the average Bush "hater" the last 8 years, they could articulate why they "hated" him, give you book, verse, and chapter on the policies or actions they were outraged by, and manage to do it in a rational, well-thoughtout way.

But this crew has been so disengaged from reality that objective facts simply do not exist in their new world. There is no capitol T truth to have a robust political discussion with them about, only Truthiness fed the by Fox, Rush, Beck, and the GOP hacks who are suffering from some delusion that driving off the remaining sane people from the GOP is a good idea.