Three and a half years ago a debate was started by Jorge about a motto that Bush was standing on, that he was a uniter and not a divider..
Here’s one mention of Bush saying that from Salon.com
From gay marriage, to military spending and tax cuts, to the war on Iraq, there seems to be a lot of issues that have kept him and a lot of the country divided. So, has Bush’s presidential term put him in the position of getting the moniker “Uniter”?
I think it’s patently obvious that he has not. I’m just a young thing, but I’ve never seen both political parties so bitterly antagonistic-- Even Clinton didn’t inspire such hated and vitirol.
About the only thing he has united is the Democratic Party (and even a few disenchanted Republicans) in opposition to him [which is a feat deserving of some respect ]. Other than that, he has been a very divisive president.
The country seems about as evenly divided as it was in 2000 (in that it is predicted to be a tight election, odds favorign Kerry slightly but increasingly) - but the sides are more “extreme” in their opposition to each other.
Just about the only way he could divide us up more thoroughly than he as so far would be to split us individually in half from skull to pelvic bones with a big ol’ axe.
Right. Mr. Cole has my undying gratitude for his insightful analysis and reporting (biased though he may be at times). Riverbend, too. Lots of bloggers. Iraqi, Iranian, European, American. The news does get through, eventually.
I also like Fark, for all of its baggage. I have a TotalFark account and it is a pretty decent way to catch little bits of news. It is also funny to see the partisan headlines, like the recent desperate scramble for WMD news. But mainly, you see some stories days before most people see them. If it is online, it is on Fark.
So there you have it. The secrets of the ages. Bloggers and Fark. They’ll tell you everything you don’t want to know.
People have mentioned the issues that Bush has fostered (Iraq, etc.) that divide the country.
But there’s also another BIG division that only seems to have gotten worse since 2000. Basically, the division between the hillbillies and the multiculturalists, the so-called Red and Blue areas.
The hillbillies have a totally different vision of what America should be. Basically, they are the ignorant, anti-intellectual, Christian, conservative white people who would easily vote for GWB because he claims to believe in Jesus and stand up for “family values.” The hillbillies don’t want gay marriage, they don’t want “under God” taken out of the pledge, and who cares if the Pub are screwing them economically, cuz this other stuff is, like, important you know?!
Those are GWB’s people. They are only the audience he plays to. And, as GWB would say, “make no mistake”: these people really, really think Bush is great, a savior of our country and culture. My mom, an otherwise intelligent woman, speaks of GWB as a “great man,” etc. It’s truly Twilight Zone to hear her talk, so different are our realities when it comes to politics.
There was a good article about this in Salon recently.
At any rate, Kerry and Edwards do have something to offer the hillbillies: economic justice. The “two Americas” theme.
We really ARE dividied in a crazy-quilt sort of way. GWB hasn’t helped matters at all.