People support Bush for all kinds of reasons. And Bush has plenty of things to earn him that support. He has conviction and a strong sense of direction, and an ability to connect with the common citizen, all great attributes in a leader.
They are the same attributes that made Reagan popular. Such attributes are sought for in periods of American history where there is a lot of doubt and fear and uncertainty, such as was the case for Reagan, and is the case for Bush.
I just disagree with many of the things he has strong convictions about, the direction he wants to lead in, and his inability to admit when he is wrong in either.
Bush also had the wisdom to surround himself with people who have experience and knowledge in all the things he doesn't. I just happen to disagree with the narrowness of their views, their outdated agendas, and Bush's refusal to listen to opinions or expertise from outside that small circle of like-minded loyalists.
Bush has a strong sense of faith and morality. These things can give a leader great strength and guidance in hard times and difficult decisions. I just don't agree with his pushing his strictly personal beliefs onto me through law, or with the apparent flexibility of his morality when it comes to issues like the poor and the ill, the environment, war, executing people, or corporate favoritism.
And Bush cut taxes. Hey, that's great. A lot of working families can use every dollar they can get, and when he proposed the cuts we had a huge surplus to cover them.
Unfortunately, he didn't adjust his plans when the budget surpluses disappeared, or when 9-11 or the Iraq War occurred, nor did he restrict spending, leading to huge deficits and national debt.
And he played a big shell game, giving the real breaks to the wealthy while shifting the tax burden onto the poor and middle class, and onto the States. We also are paying in the form of lost services once paid for by our taxes.
It is also true that, just as the Democratic platform appeals to peaceniks and the more naïve utopian end of the liberal spectrum, the Republican Party platform and agenda appeals to homophobes, racists, fundamentalist extremists, and of course those who want to make abortion illegal so bad they'd make a deal with the devil to do so.
Unfortunately, whenever I say, for example, that homophobia contributed to Bush's election I get an outraged letter telling me how the writer is a PhD well-informed individual who supports Bush based on good reasons, how dare I call them a homophobe, etcetera and so forth. Problem is that I never said that that person voted for Bush because of homophobia. I said homophobia contributed to Bush's victory.
As a socially progressive, fiscally conservative Democrat-by-default, I don't take it personally when people complain about old-school tax and spend liberals like Ted Kennedy, for example, or criticize the idealists who want peace, love, and equality and want it now, or mock Ben Affleck's attempts at political discourse. Because I know what I don't like about the Democratic Party, I know what I personally believe and do, just as I know what I don't like about the Republican Party.
So if you don't like being associated with homophobia, racism, religious extremism, warmongering, corporate corruption, or slashing education and social programs, etcetera and so forth, don't blame me. I didn't make the Republican Party what it is.
And if you don't share any of the attributes I criticize, well then, I'm not talking about you. So don't get mad at me for reminding you of the uncomfortable truth about the party you support. Do something to change your own party, and I promise to try and change mine.
Respond to Randy
Back to top