a small rant on Republican bashing

[Bertha Venation]

Stop it. It makes you look like an idiot.

This is my opinion. Feel free to ignore it. Feel free to flame away as you tell me all the reasons (such as the lamest, most immature one of them all: "they do it so I will too!") you will keep on calling them "repukes," "freeptards," "repugnicans," and offering whatever gross generalizations you will. :eyes:

Edited to add that my point is namecalling and gross generalizations

[beawr]

1. No Kidding

For Pete's sake, they ARE approximately half of our nation. Now, their leadership, that's another matter.

[Deja Q]

2. It makes us feel good!

I'd tell you how we can best resolve this, but then nobody'd be on DU...! :evilgrin:

Also, will the freepers stop calling us DUmmies, et al?!

[Bertha Venation]

3. "will the freepers stop calling us..."

Sweetie, honestly, what do you care? :)

[BiggJawn]

4. Can I call them "ReTHUGlicans"...

AFTER they throw me over a chair and rip my jeans down?

Bertha, It may come as a surprise that I value your opinion, but it IS, after all, YOUR opinion.

And MINE is that "ReTHUGlican" is a perfeectly good description of the THUGS who have hijacked this country.

Perhaps I should call them "Corporo-Fascists" but then people would say "Stop calling them 'Fascists', none of them look like Mussolini..".

You call 'em how YOU see 'em, and I'll call 'em how I see 'em....

[TrogL]

9. OOOF!! That was rather graphic.

(wrong smilie)

AFTER they throw me over a chair and rip my jeans down?

:scared:

[Stevendsmith]

12. Couldn't Have Said it Better

[Southsideirish]

5. Oh Christ - a Goody Two Shoes!

Just what we need - after what they (most worthy and noble Republican brethren, that is) did to us in 2000? Smile sweetly and turn the other cheek "seventy times seven"? How Karl Rove would admire us and say, "Oh, how honorable they are - I think I, too, will take the "high road" in my political dealings!"
As Harold Washington said "politics ain't beanbag" - its no game - especially not for the feint of heart.

[Bertha Venation]

6. golly

Ow.

[salinen]

10. Harold Washington?

Haven't heard his name for awhile. Anyway, I guess world wide protesting in the streets against an illegal war is also bashing? Or are you just referring to name calling?

[Bertha Venation]

11. to answer your questions: Of course not, and Yes.

eom

[Southsideirish]

35. Hey - not me - I was out there in the streets "bashing away" on Bush.

and Repubickans, too. I wholeheartedly believe in bashing Republickans- bash, bash and...bash.
Its this other person who started this thread who doesn't.
I'm a passionate Dem.
P.S. We Chicagoans always hold Harold Washington as one of our hero's.

[NightTrain]

37. Well put!

As I recently explained to a member of the liberal community's "pompous-uptight wing" who chastized me for leaving a nasty note on a freeper's car over his mean-spirited bumper stickers:

The left has been silent for far too long. It's time to get into these right-wing bastards' faces and give it to them with everything we've got! :nuke:

Actually, that's what I've been doing all along. Just took the rest of y'all a couple of decades to catch up to my forward thinking! :evilgrin:

[FunBobbyMucha]

7. bertha, I agree with your premise. I do. But...

...do you think that some of this is our side finally trying to show that we will fight the fight? We've been characterized by the right as pu--ies for so long. When Al Franken was asked how the Left was gonna become relevant again, part of this answer centered on us not just "taking it" anymore. I think the stuff you're objecting to is us trying to finally push back at that school yard bully who has menacingly brushed against us a hundred times while we said "excuse me."

[Bertha Venation]

42. FunBobby, use your imagination.

Imagine trying to push back at the schoolyard bully without telling him he's ugly or stupid or asking him "how's Uncle Daddy." What could one of us say that would be just as forceful as the shit they give us without being just as much of a putrid, hate-spewing asshole as he is? Use your imagination.

Baffle them if you have to. Using logic is a damn good way to do so, in my experience. Or just bullshit them. You can do that without being filthy and nasty and without casting aspersions upon their heritage or otherwise insulting them personally. (Brett Butler says she used to introduce her ex as "this is my first husband" -- while they were still married. "He'd get this dim, confused look on his face . . . and say, 'uh . . . whut? . . . aw, shit, I got a headache now.'")

I am not objecting to fighting hard and poking out eyes and kicking nuts. If someone breaks my nose I'm going to break his back, and worse.

I am objecting to making asses of ourselves just as freepers make of themselves.

[11 Bravo]

8. Before they savaged Max Cleland I might have agreed with you.

Now I say fuck 'em all with a shit-dipped cactus. There is NO name or term for them that I can see myself objecting to.

[dae]

13. Berthas right; but, I second your emotion.

:kick:

[TXlib]

26. BWA HA HA HA HA

"fuck 'em all with a shit-dipped cactus"

Owwie!

[Rabrrrrrr]

14. Aye. I try always to make the distinction between the regular republicans

that is, the general masses who are merely unlearned and not informed yet (though some are also racist homophobic morans who don't deserve a lot of respect), and the republican leadership, which is evil, wrong, and dangerous. The leadership I don't mind calling by derogatory names, but the general masses I think we should extend courtesy to, and call them what they are - republicans. or at least republican idiots. But not repukes.

But I don't mind calling the leadership something demeaning, since they really aren't republicans to begin with. They just found the party that they could most easily infiltrate and take over with their nefarious plans of . . . hell, I don't even know what they want. Corporate domination? Christian theocratic domination? Armageddon? The End Times? A Feudal Aristocracy? I don't think even they know what they want, but once they get rid of all of us, they're gonna have another big battle amongst themselves for primacy. It's the pseudo-republican way - it's al about being on top and winning; it's never about sharing or spreading the wealth and power around. :-)

[TXlib]

27. This is what they want

Some want to enrich themselves financially, no matter the cost to others.

Some are fundies who think they can actually bring about Armageddon.

Some just worship power for its own sake.

But I do fervantly believe the top-level neo-con leadership and PNAC are Brownshirt thugs who will do anything -- ANYTHING -- to gain and maintain power, provided they think they can get away with it.

[Rabrrrrrr]

38. Yep on all counts

hence my statement I but once they get rid of all of us, they're gonna have another big battle amongst themselves for primacy. It's the pseudo-republican way - it's al about being on top and winning; it's never about sharing or spreading the wealth and power around.

And when I said I don't think even they know what they want, I meant as a group; because they really aren't a group. They're a collective, at this point, that has agreed to hate the same things for the moment, until those things are gone.

And exactly as you say in the your last sentence - the leadership are thugs who will do anything for power. Too bad that the lower ranks, normal-people republicans don't see how much their party has been hijacked by a bunch of craven thugs who don't care abotu America at all, and are against a one-world government, but only because they're working on their own form of a one-world government with Reagan as the God Image and them controlling everything on Earth: eevry person, every oucne of resources, every square inch of land, everything.

[SOteric]

15. Oh, good heavens yes. I agree with you.

For many of us, that's a malicious insult of those who are members of our families, our life-long friends and even a few treasured coworkers. It certainly doesn't pursuade a fence-sitter to come 'round to our way of thinking if we're busy saying hateful things about their spouse and/or best friend.

[salinen]

16. Some of the most vehement adjectives

come from ex-freepers. I think they should get a pass.

[SOteric]

18. And I think

they, of all people, should know better.

[TXlib]

29. Perhaps

many, if not most, of us tone down our rhetoric in person quite a bit, especially when talking to a fence sitter. I tend to regard DU as a safe place to vent, and when I vent, I tend to get hyperbolic.

[SOteric]

48. I agree that most probably don't

speak with such hyperbole when in the presence of someone they know to be a fence sitter.

And DU should be a safe place to vent. But venting doesn't have to include hate.

Hate speech is hate speech. You may not personally be the problem, here Tex, 'cause you can be pretty reasonable. But read some of the stuff that get's said around this forum.

Then ask yourself what makes that 'safe place' mentality any different than a bunch of rich white guys sitting around at their exclusive country club using the 'n' word and every other racial epithet.

Never mind the fence sitters. This is language that is causing divisiveness within families.

Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm never going to happily go along with fostering hate.

[jimbo fett]

17. But it feels so goooooood.

[salinen]

19. I actually agree with you SO

But........I........can't..........help........myself........ahh..........(%(*^)(&(^(%($^%@%$%(*&^.

[geniph]

20. You know, that could be a brilliant strategy

don't let people blow off steam with a little relatively innocuous name-calling, then they'll get so fired up they'll have to go DO something instead of relieving their anger by childish taunts on the Internet.

[ewagner]

21. Bertha, my better instincts tend to agree

with you. The name calling and invectives are counter-productive to changing any minds on the other side.

However, I've been a street-fightin' politician since I was in college and I can tell you with absolute certainty that the name-calling and villianization of your opponents serves a very good purpose. It's a way of solidifying the base. It's a way of rallying the troops against the enemy. (ever notice how in all the old war movies the other side is dehumanized? ) It's the same process.

The name-calling isn't against the Republicans it's more for us . The nicknames are the banners, symbols we rally around in order to give each other the courage, the motivation to fight back.

When giving a speech, of course I never villanized the opponent. But among the supporters, no holds were barred . That, alone, made for a tight, cohesive group willing to walk across hot coals for the cause.

Just another perspective.

[Bertha Venation]

22. Your post makes me think of the DU in "Full Metal Jacket."

I hope you get the reference cause I'm not sure I can explain how I made that connection.

The war/rallying troops analogy is apt, but it actually adds more ammunition to my argument. I'm a thorough pacifist, and maybe sometimes that keeps me from showing my anger as much as I'd like to.

I agree with those who've written that we must fight the evil the Republican party has come to embody. I disagree that it must be done through ugly vilification and hateful rhetoric.

You must be the change you wish to see in the world.

[ewagner]

23. Yes, I get the reference

and I understand how you can make the analogy.

You have raised a very interesting problem for all of us. Let me see if I can articulate it:

In the 2004 election, much is at stake. I can even agree with some that the very existance of our country is at stake. How far do you think the Republican Party will go to hold onto power? And the $64,000,000 question: How far are we willing to go to stop them?

We may come upon a terrible choice. To either hold onto our principles and lose the country, or, to compromise our principles to save our country.

Your post brought these questions to mind immediately.

Great post Bertha...and equally great discussion.

[Kanary]

34. "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."

I agree with you so completely.

We do ourselves no favors by emulating that which we detest.

I'm rather amazed at the confusion between fighting back and maintaining standards. I agree it's easier to just thrash about with whatever words come to mind, but...... it doesn't really accomplish much. Real strategy is much harder, but more productive in the end.

What I *don't* see people really looking at is when you get used to dehumanizing the "other side" and flinging out whatever words you care to use, it becomes that much easier to start using the same terms with those closer to you. That has certainly happened right here, and it isn't helping us.

Kanar

[GoddessOfGuinness]

28. oops...wrong place!

see below...

[Sir_Shrek]

24. Agreed....

My life became a whole lot better when I decided that, for as much as I like politics and political debate, I will not allow politics to choose my friends. I've made lots of great friendships this way, and I've realized that people I would've called a name or decided I would rather have nothing to do with once I found out their politics are people I A) have more in common with than I ever thought and B) have had some great times with.

Plus, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to bash people and the hope you'll open their eyes. Is a Republican going to give your side of the issue a fair listen if you can't manage a little self-control and refrain from creative ways of insulting them based on his political affiliation?

[slackmaster]

25. Yes, name-callers suck ass

:D

I agree that personal attacks, overgeneralizations, guilt by association, etc. are all weak debating tactics at best.

[YNGW]

30. I appreciate what you're saying...

... but you might as well be telling it to a brick.

I take that back. The brick might listen.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

31. Vilification and nasty rhetoric

did wonders for drumming up support to remove Nazis from power.

Ok, we don't have a holocaust of the same scale as Hitler's; but there are some truly horrible things happening here and now because of republicans and with their blessings. My feeling is it's up to them to persuade me that they're anything other than evil...then I'll change my rhetoric.

I'm amazed at how pig-headed I sound...and I don't even care.

[KamaAina]

32. DU is the marketplace of ideas

I said this to the now-departed jiacinto when he expressed his dislike for "Repuke" in particular.

If you can come up with something zippier, and more civil, than "Repuke" or "Rethug" or "Repig" or whatever, start using it in your posts! Who knows? It might catch on, as "Cheap Labor Conservatives" did for a couple of weeks late last year.

[Skittles]

33. I simply refuse to captitalize "republican"

I will show them no amount of respect whatsoever.

[hlthe2b]

36. While your post is (undoubtedly) sincere and makes a point...

I think we need to work on civility among DUers for our own candidates first, which has included comments that make any of the insulting names towards our opponents seem polite. We need to work on the often misogynistic comments that come flowing when an outrageous deed is attributed to someone of the female gender. We need to work on some of our blatantly prejudicial sweeping generalizations of various regions of the country and its people, particularly given the amount of DUers who hail from these regions. We need to work on giving each other benefit of the doubt when they make a point counter to our own beliefs and not jump to the conclusion that they may be a "stealth RWer." We need to be more respectful of the various religions, including Catholicism, Islam... as well as those who choose not to follow any religion. We need to realize and respect that many DUers consider themselves to be sincerely religious and not make sweeping negative generalizations about Christianity (or other religions) based on the perversion by any subset membership of that group.

I could go on, and on, and on. I will not though. With all due respect to the poster's intentions, I just want to put this whole thing with the name calling of Republicans into perspective. While it is something to strive for, I think there are other issues to address that are more critically and immediately important. In the meantime, if there are (sometimes childish) insulting references to Republicans that pervade DU, as we prepare for the most important political "battle" that we may face in coming decades, well, I can live with that. We have more immediately critical areas to focus on right now, IMHO.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

39. If you stop namecalling, grossly generalizing, and bashing Repubs..

..then Ann Coulter wins!
Seriously.
These are the things she accuses us of doing, yet she does the EXACT SAME things to us, constantly. When we stop, we'll be left only with Republicans (led by Mr. Coulter) bashing us--and we'll be sitting on the sidelines like scared little pansies. We have to fight back. But don't you worry--this little war will stop when Mr. Coulter accidentally chokes herself with her enormous manhands, or falls victim to the anorexia she suffers.

[IronLionZion]

40. a lot of Republicans hate Bush too

so I guess we are all on the same side. If you think all Republicans support big government, war, reconstruction, fiscal waste, immigration, and the other bullshit that is goin on then you have been hoodwinked by Karl Rove's psychological campaign.

[IronLionZion]

41. remember that before they hijacked the country

they had to hijack the Republican party. "They" means the right-wing fanatics like Bush and Reagan. The party of Lincoln and Eisenhower was not so bad before these bastards took over.

Even papa Bush was better than his eldest and most stupid son.

[rucky]

43. I'm sure that if I met one face to face...

I'd be civil & polite.

O8)

[shanti]

44. feck no, i'm not stopping this at all!

it feels SOOOOOO good!

[Dees]

45. I will not stop bashing Repukes at DU. I'm notta gonna dahit.

I know I'm preaching to the choir but I'm still not going to stop. After being called much worse by Rethugs over the years like Commie, Pinko and environwhacko I don't think calling the Repukes Repukes is all that bad. I certainly can't do it at work or family gatherings. Bashing the brethren Repukes is masturbation for the mind. Bertha, hit your remote.

on edit sp

[cryofan]

46. say it again, Sam, say it again

All the riduculous GOp bashing drives me crazy. I wouldn't mind it if the bashers were more accurate in their targets. But just this aimless hatred of republicans is silly and stupid. Hate regressive taxation, by all means....that is what you should hate.

[tigereye]

47. I guess I've always thought we should act better than they do

in general. Attack the argument. Ad hominem attacks have little power in an argument.

But at the same time, it is nice to have a place to vent. We have some pretty good descriptive adjectives to apply to certain Reps. here at home when little ears are not listening.