Ogre brings up an interesting point
But BDS is completely different. These people are openly opposed to Bush personally. These people blame Bush personally for things like global warming. When Bush leaves office, there is going to be a vast hole in these people’s lives. Like most people, they will need to seek something to fill that vast hole. I do not know what they will do with themselves. We can hope and pray that they find something good with which to fill that hole (like Jesus), but I suspect that will not be the case. Instead, I suspect they will become zealots for some other religion — like environmentalism or global warming.
What do you think these people will do with themselves?
From my point of view, I believe that BDS is not so much about being ant-everythingBush, but about being against everything that does not fit in their narrow world view. And being unhinged, of course. W just happens to be an easy target, mostly having to do with being the President and a Republican. Add in the close 2000 election along with the continuing expansion of the internet to allow the wonkadoodles to spread their insane messages, and it became about Bush.
Had McCain won the primaries, then 2000 elections, especially if it was as close, and had the same issues, we would have had MDS. We would probably have had slurs similar to those as about Reagan. Too old, he must be getting senile. He probably naps half the day away. Add in some thoughts feelings about the North Vietnamese messing up his mind, talking slowly, and the other stuff that might set them off, and you have an easy target. Maybe not quite as much, as the media sort of liked McCain back in 2000, but, from the nutroots, big time.
But, again, he would simply be an excuse to direct their seething anger, which is the norm. We can already see this starting with folks like Fred!, Rudy, and Mitt. If one of them wins in 2008, come 2009, their derangement will transfer to that Republican. Anything and everything Conservative, or, neocon, if you will, is a target. The president, as the "leader" of the GOP and neocons, is just the focal point. And Bush is an easy target. The way he walks, the way he talks, the way he makes up words, and stumbles on others. Plus, the way he refuses to fight back.
With the rise of the internet in the late 90’s, and the ease of creating a website and spreading the word, people who were unhinged were able to spread their view and band together across not only the country, but the world. Before then, you would just have a small group of nutters complaining. Now, you have them not only reinforcing their feelings around the world, but dragging folks who used to be rational into their insanity and irrational hatred. Folks who should know better start sounding more and more unhinged.
Consider friends, whether on-line or in Real Lifeâ„¢, who have liberal/Democrat leanings. Over the past 6 years, have you noticed a certain perpensity to get a little more moonbat each day/month/year? I have.
If you do not believe in global warming as caused by Man, you must be a denier, on par with those who deny the Holocaust. Unless you are the leader of Iran, then it is OK. If you do not believe in taxing the hell out of the rich, then you must be an evil person who does not want to help the poor. If you believe in threatening, or engaging, in military action, rather then sitting down to tea, you must be an evil warmonger. You know all the rest.
Even if a Dem wins the presidency in 2008, and Congress remains in the hands of the Dems, the Dems will find a specific person to demonize and aim their viotrol at. Yes, they will continue to spread the hate around. Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, Malkin, WalMart, rich Republicans (rich liberals are exempt), any republican. But, they will find one specific person to aim it all at.
