Democrats and others on the left hated George W. Bush. They hated him (and still do) with all the passion and bile they can muster. Old news, I know.
Now that a liberal Democrat is President, hatred is being redefined as hoping Obama fails.
In a comment I left (I sometimes write for this blog) I said this:
What I hope Mr. Obama fails at is turning us into socialist state - or at least more than what we are.
Are the left-wing ideologues who venomously hated Mr. Bush any better than those who might feel similar to Mr. Obama?
Personally, I certainly don't wish President Obama any personal ill will. I certainly don't hate him. But I disagree with a lot of what President Obama hopes to accomplish. I think it's wrong for the country.
Is that a wish for failure? In a way, but no more than I hoped that some of Mr. Bush's policies would fail because I thought they were ill conceived.
In a two party system, we will have different ideas as to how the country should be run. Dissent IS patriotic, isn't it?
I would really like to know how many Democrats hoped Mr. Bush would succeed? And now that their apparent savior is in office, Mr. Obama is now sacrosanct. To question Obama or to think that his agenda is somehow above the harsh light of criticism now seems to be off limits. When Bush waas President, we were told that "dissent is patriotic". Now that Obama is President, it's a vehicle for hatred.
No one (or anyone I would associate with) wants to see our new President harmed in any way. What I and the tens of millions of people who did not vote for Obama hope is that he isn't successful at turning us into some form of socialist state where dissent squashed and opportunity is limited.
If questioning Obama and his agenda is somehow equated with hatred, is the quashing of dissent not lurking far behind?
VW








Comments