It's Great That Democrats Are Fighting Back & All...

[rucky]

But is anybody else disturbed by a climate of incivility in this country that seems to be heating up even worse? Hate radio, the internet is full of flame wars and unabashed partisan hate. There is no unbiased media - just bias & counterbias.

We didn't start it, but will it ever finish? We must defend ourselves, and we must attack back - but what will it accomplish other than our turn at a temporary reign of power? All I see is a cycle of attack & revenge - no matter who's in power. Will the Democrats & Republicans treat each other with respect ever again? Do we even care about unity or "common ground" at this point? It's not as much that we're in disagreement as the vitrol that's behind it all. It would be easier not to care, but the incivility back and forth is disturbing me. I don't see what good can come of it.

[TheDonkey]

1. Begun this Partisan War has.

I believe the nation is headed towards a Jacksonian times of truly biased, party run media with Americans clearly on one side of the fence. Soon you'll see the congress get worse and more vocally outraged than usual.

It's going to get worse here (the climate) than better. I think hate radio, Clinton's impeachment, and Bush are to blame for the intense hate.

[mhr]

2. No - You Are Witnessing An Epic Struggle Between The Haves and Have Nots

With the advent of the Internet, the disparity in wealth and inequality can no longer be covered by a "benefit of the doubt" rubric.

Incivility will grow until one side wins or loses.

We are beyond a middle ground.

[Tommy_21]

5. Agreed!

You hit the nail on the head. The people are mad because they have been duped by the fascist republicans. The fascist republicans are mad because they know that they are going to lose this election and it will be the end of their terrorist war on poor people of color.

[salib]

6. Then, who are the "have's", and who the "have-not's"?

If one simple takes a look at one of the many GLOBAL assessments of have's and have-not's (e.g., http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/data/), it is clear that we (US citizens, i.e., those that will vote for whatever administration) are "have's." And the ratio is MUCH WORSE between the have's and have-not's across national borders than it is here in the States.

So, just whom are the have-not's rebelling against in this "Epic Struggle"? And just what military is going to protect those have's from the "terrorists."

Food for thought, not to eat. Always make me sick.

[mhr]

7. Wealth Disparity In The US Is The Greatest Since The Gilded Age

Need One say more?

[salib]

10. Wealth Disparity in the World

From http://www.undp.org/teams/english/facts.htm

A quarter of the world’s population, 1.3 billion people, live in severe poverty...

Nearly 800 million people do not get enough food, and about 500 million people are chronically malnourished. More than a third of children are malnourished.
In industrial countries more than 100 million people live below the poverty line, more than 5 million people are homeless and 37 million are jobless.
Of the world’s 23 million people living with HIV/AIDS more than 93% live in developing countries.
More than 840 million adults are illiterate - 538 million of them are women.
Around 2 million children died as a result of armed conflict in the last decade.
In developing countries 160 million pre-school children are underweight.
1.2 billion people live without access to safe drinking water.
110 million landmines lie undetonated in 68 countries.

So, again, I think we are OBVIOUSLY the have's in comparison. It is so important to challenge those that want to profit and accumulate at others (everyone else's) expense. We are them in global terms. Just because we have our own (must less extreme) wealth discrepancies, does not change the fact that if there is an epic struggle of the have's vs. have-not's, then we are definitely on the site of the have's.

[sadiesworld]

20. If we can't help ourselves, God help the rest of the planet.

[BiggJawn]

23. But I don't LIVE "globally", do I?

I take scant comfort from the knowledge that I'd be the richest Mo-Fo in half of Burma when I'm wondering *IF* I'll ever be able to "retire" here in middle-America.

When I live in the same town as people who can afford to not notice when the phone bill goes up, or gasoline jumps another 20 cents, or that the Pizza King has raised the price $2 in 2 years, and I feel ALL those things deeply, frankly, I could GIVE a shit how the rest of the Third World is fairing.

Yeah, yeah, I know, "I was moaning about not 'getting any', then I met the man with no danglies..."

I'm a "Have Not", and I won't bother checking voter cards when It starts.

[sleepystudent]

22. That's sort of romantic...

First off, people that are truly "have-nots" cant afford to access the Internet on a regular basis. "Have-nots" are likely working multiple jobs to stay afloat so they don't have time to keep up with current events and politics(Sometimes I think this is insidious and deliberate-work them so they don't know what's going on) I seriously doubt that many of these "have-nots" are entertaining thoughts of a "class war"-that's something that Beltway pundits and ivory tower residents trot out. They are probably, unfortunately, just vaguely disgruntled and not certain how or if they will get out of their predicament. And they are not posting here-they probably haven't even heard of DU.

There was major economic inequality and worker abuse during the Gilded Age and what eventually came of that? Indirectly, trust busting laws and decades later, the New Deal. Not a war like so many people on here seem to perversely wish for.

And the Internet solving the disparity in wealth and inequality? It's creating new inequalities and breaking people into smaller, more specialized factions which just operate sealed off from each other. It's not as much of a community as people think. Just my 2 cents.

3. better that it's out in the open

than repressed where it will cause more eventual damage

[Memekiller]

4. Would a conservative ever ask these questions?

Probably not. And Democrats will be blamed for partisanship regardless of whether they engage in it or not. But unlike the other side, our attacks have a basis in fact. So long as that holds true, I'm for it.

[Jade Fox]

8. Sadly, I think it is going to get worse....

once Kerry is in office. The Bush supporters will be ENRAGED because their
hero not only lost, he lost primarily due to his own incompetence and
corruption. They will try and make someone pay, rather than honestly
confront this reality. We need to be prepared.

The only thing I can see to do is to try and reach beyond the labels of
conservative/liberal to any sane people who can be worked with. Its been
noted by many that Bush is not a conservative in the traditional sense.
I find myself agreeing with a lot of ideas that thoughtful conservatives have
and I think we have an opportunity to start talking to each other now.
In a bizarre way, Bush has given us that.

[yardwork]

9. I think that the way religion has been brought into the argument

has become a large part of the problem. The Christian Right raised the bar on disagreements. It used to be that conservatives and liberals disagreed with one another, period. Now, if you aren't a conservative, it means that you are an atheist.

[guitar man]

21. Let's remind them of that

Let's remind them of thet every time they want to use the argument that "80-90% of the US population believes in God" when they want to push a "religion in government" portion of their agenda. Seems to me in the last election,slightly over 50% of us voted Democrat. So,one figure or the other has to be in error.

[joe_sixpack]

11. I see a future where

it is no longer enough just to present the differences between one party's candidate and the other, or sell your ideas as better for the Country. Each side will now have to tear down the other, making out their representitive as the equivalent of a Hitler, a lying traitorous bastard, or something else equally horrific. Expect it to start from Republicans the minute Kerry is elected. And I'd expect you'd see it here too, whenever the next Republican after Bush runs.

[Vickers]

12. Bush squandered such an opportunity...

...all that goodwill and unity right after 9/11, and what does he do with it?

Patriot Act
revenge war
international isolation
fundraising
etc.

I'm not much of a crybaby, but when I think of what could've been accomplished by somebody with some true compassion, and a modicum of brains...it's just sad.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

13. If we were just up against moderate Republicans

it might be a different story. But we aren't. The bush faction is extremist to the hilt, and therefore dangerous.

And I agree with the other posters who said this is bigger than politics. I think it is. Or will be soon.

[mmonk]

14. I actually can't even pretend to like any

republicans anymore (even the more moderate ones). I will even refuse to give to my local real estate PAC because the money is divided up between different candidates including republicans. I'm also for reform in the Democratic party to disinclude any who support the general ideas promoted by the neocons. I'm reminded of a line in Chalmers Johnson's book, "The Sorrows of Empire" which states;
"Failing such a reform, Nemesis, the goddess of retribution and vengeance, the punisher of pride and hubris, waits impatiently for her meeting with us". I want to save my country from that.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

15. Bias and...counterbias?

Did somebody say, Counterbias?
Hehehe...

[Nlighten1]

16. At the pace it is going...

this could flash up very quickly. The stakes are the highest they have ever been. I believe that if these guys see themselves as being "up against the wall" they will do something terrible.

The best we can hope for is for someone to leak that August PDB. I don't believe the Democrats have the will to really take Bush on. It seems to me they are just sitting back and letting him destroy himself. Not a bad tactic either because Dubya is scewing up big time.

[mot78]

17. You're right, Americans are becoming more partisan

which will also mean an increase in voter turnout and a decline in apathy for politics. We are seeing an era of partisanship not seen since the 1870's and 1880's, when both parties had had the same number of seats in Congress, and where Presidents of both parties were narrowly elected (ie. 1876 and 1888...well those were because of the Electoral College).

[PROGRESSIVE1]

18. The Right Wing started all of this!!!!! It's getting bad now because....

we Liberals are now standing up and fighting back against these
Un-American Fascists!!! That's right, Right Wingers are FASCISTS!!!!
They HATE democracy, they HATE freedom, they HATE dissent!!!!!

They are getting so rabid because we decided to NOT take this crap anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:kick:

[Junkdrawer]

19. We spit back in their eye after years of getting the shit beat out of us..

and now we're uncivil?

[camero]

24. Sorry to burst your bubble

But it's about survival now. The Bushies have gone too far. That's when civility goes out the window.

[MonicaR]

25. If we'd fought these conservajerks 20 years ago...

Our country wouldn't be in the mess it's in now.

[camero]

27. It's true

You can only be decieved for so long. Too many people were fat and happy then and didn't care for others just like now. It's only escalated, sadly.

[UTUSN]

26. No. n/t

[Misinformed01]

28. Welcome to Hell

if you don't like it, then you should find a different hobby-

[DjTj]

29. It could have been different, but this is the path we have chosen...

"... and it is also up to you to demand a campaign that is about addressing the problems of the American people and lifting them up, and not about politicians attacking one another. That is the campaign you deserve ..."

[mourningdove92]

30. Rucky, you must be reading my mind. This very thing has been

on my mind all evening. On my way home from work, listening to r/w talk radio, I heard callers spouting such venom against the "liberals". They were saying such awful things.

It sounded a lot like what we say here. How did we get so polarized?

I know that I, for one, was totally shocked and at a loss as to what to do when the RW cranked up the attack machine against President Clinton. It was beyond anything I had ever seen before, and I lived through Watergate, which was mild by comparison. Then came the theft of the 2000 election.
Then came 911. Then all hell broke loose.

Will we ever come together again? Is this viciousness and hatred to be with us always? I must admit to my own guilt here. I HAVE NOT gotten over what was done to President Clinton, I HAVE NOT gotten over the stolen election, and I HAVE NOT gotten over the way Bush has squandered our good will among the nations, and I HAVE NOT gotten over the way he has exploited the deaths of the 911 victims and his careless attitude over our daily loss of life in Iraq.

My anger is strong. My reasons valid. But my question remains. Will it always be this way? If Kerry is elected, does anyone doubt he will be treated the way President Clinton was treated? If Bush manages to get elected (or reselected) I know we will keep up the heat. The hatred will grow.

Is there a solution? Is this a kind of psychic cleansing on a national level? Will it ever level off?

am I getting on your nerves yet? sorry about the rambling, but I am really concerned about our country.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

31. Enough is Enough. I am MORE than WILLING to be...

"polarized".

I will not be told by the Reich Wing, Rednecks, KKKristian Reich, and "Hitler" Hannity about how I am "Un-American"!!!!

[mdmc]

32. Dems fighting back? WHERE? Wow!

I thought we just jocked the right wing and bitched about Nader.
No good will come from poor manners.