Why so much hatred?

Original Title: Why so much Hatred from Republicans?

Why are so many Republicans so full of hatred, fear and anger?

I expect to be criticized for making such a statement, on the grounds that I have gotten angry at times and used harsh words and I admit that’s true. I’m only human. But to react in that manner occassionally is different from dwelling in hatred, anger, fear, divisiveness and prejudice continuously, day after day, every comment, every post, without provocation, apparently taking great pleasure in dwelling in such a world rather than instinctively reacting in that manner on occassion.

But there seem to be a disprapportionate number of Republicans who apparently revel in personal attacks, prejudice, character assasination and insults. I recall plenty of examples from back home. Of course it’s not true of all Republicans (generalizations are never true all the time) but it seems to be true in many cases.

One might think that such conduct was due to pre-election tensions and now that they’ve won the election, the insults might let up, but here on forumosa anyway they haven’t. For a number of republican posters, the vast majority of their comments on forumosa have always been and continue to be for the purpose of degrading others and apparently making themselves feel superior.

Is this true? Are there a disproportionate number of Republicans who seem to get-off on attacking and insulting others? Is the Republican party the party of hate? Why is that? This is intended as a serious question.

The history of the Republican Party post-reconstructions is that during the 60’s it became the party of “White Flight,” particularly in the South where the polarization due to the civil rights activism lead by the Democratic party.

So that within the Republican party, people often joke, is a man with a pillow case over his head. Like David Duke KKK-Republican.

Many political analysis have speculated that in recent years the Republican party has been the voice of “White victimization” by the liberals.

I am sure the list is endless given the fact the Republican party get much of its support from Christian Conservatives now, which in USA history has been know to viciously attack individuals and institutions that do not conform with their views.

Look, it is just as easy to write down everything you said and substitute the word republican(s) with democrat(s). I think if you really mean what you said that is pretty ignorant (that would be my opinion, but opinions are like assholes, everybody has one). There are extremes on both sides of the balance, but most people are in between. Don’t get all worked up about it and think that if you are in a red state everybody is a diehard republican and if you are in a “blue” state everybody is a diehard democrat. And don’t start thinking that if you see somebody who goes to church every Sunday he is a racist or somebody who blindly supports gay-bashing or anything like that. It just isn’t true. In my own family we have people who have opposing points of view and we respect that. My old man is a democrat and he is also an ordained minister. So not all Christian conservatives are republicans you know. Diversity is the lifeblood of our democracy. Paranoia will destroy ya.

wow, i guess democrats/liberals never hurl insults at the other side. your posts are so objective, mt. :wink:

As a former Republican (now “none of the above”) I think the reason why Republicans are more vitriolic than Democrats is they believe the US is pure good in a struggle for its very survival with pure evil and anyone who would suggest otherwise is a treasonous patsy worthy of nothing more than scorn and contempt.

Democrats on the other hand don’t see current international events in such black and white terms and so are less likely to have such absolute scorn for opposing opinions.

Republicans are afraid that liberals(democrats) of the East and West coasts (like traitor Kerry) are willing to sell the US(and what it stands for) out in favor of a One World government in which the basic goodness of the US would be negated by all the Third World nations. For example, just look at the UN shenanigans.

lol. oh my god. i really hope you’re trying to be facetious again, spook. :laughing:

nytimes.com/2004/11/05/opini … ugman.html

and many, many more.

it’s hillarious you guys have such blinkers on that you can’t even see the anger radiating from your own side. :notworthy:


My view is Democrats initiated the modern era of incivility in public life during the Bork/Reagan days. It just wasn’t quite as viciously personal on such a widespread basis before that time.

I think many long-time politicians of both parties have made that observation.

I was also one of those (ex) Republicans who believed Bill and Hillary Clinton were guilty of moral turpitude – just as I believe George Bush is – and so aren’t the completely innocent victims of right-wing depravity many Democrats hold them up to be, though there were right-wing zealots who concocted fantastical charge against them on top of the valid ones.

Post 911 though when the Republican Party circled its wagons and went into its “you’re either with us or against us” mode, Republicans have all but abandoned rationality and taken civility in public life to new lows.

As an Independent, I have always tried to vote for the person who I felt was the best candidate, whether that person is a member of the Republican, Democratic or Scooby Doo Party. At times I have thought about joining the Democratic Party, but have always preferred to remain an Independent (for some reason, I just hate joining groups). Although I vote Republican on occasion, I have never contemplated joining the Republican Party. Two examples of why I could never join the Republican Party are the following Senator-elects:

Jim DeMint, South Carolina’s new senator-elect, who believes that homosexuals and pregnant single women who live with their boyfriends should not be teachers.

Tom Coburn, Oklahoma’s new Senator-elect, who advocates the death penalty for abortionists and has been quoted in the past as saying that:

“The gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country, and they wield extreme power.”

“That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalization for abortion and multiple sexual partners? That’s a gay agenda.”

Coburn is a doctor - an obstetrician, to be exact, who once admitted sterilizing a 20-year-old woman without her written consent.

news.independent.co.uk/world/ame … ory=580547

Given the Bush Administration’s talk of amending the US Constitution to ban gay marriage, I can only conclude that the Republican Party is not opposed to using anti-gay rhetoric to win Congressional and Presidential elections. While this fact will not cause me to never vote Republican again, it certainly will keep me from ever joining their party. This stuff sounds a bit hateful to me.

Perhaps, there are individual Democrats who have similar views on gay marriage and abortion. I don


Can I also suggest that you look at the Democrats such as

Al Sharpton
Jesse Jackson
Charles Schumer
Representative Waxman
Barbara Boxer
Cynthia McKinney

If you want loonie tunes there are plenty on both sides. Read all about it.

Maybe it’s that the types of issues that are important to Repubs tend to attract more aggressive/hostile types of people than the types of issues that are important to members of other parties or non-members.

That is, major concerns for Repubs include fighting terrorism, protecting our borders, strong military, intervention in “dangerous” regions of the world, protecting the right to bear arms, protecting “moral values” (i.e. preventing others from making personal choices that those in power find objectionable), decreased restrictions on the consumption of natural resources. Those are aggressive, intrusive, “hot” issues that might seem attractive to more hostile, aggressive followers. I recognize repubs claim to be interested in other issues such as jobs, the economy, tax cuts, etc., but those issues don’t define the Republican party like the first issues I mentioned.

The Democratic party, on the other hand, does not put the military, gun, terror and imposition of “moral values” on others as its primary concerns, instead focusing more on jobs, economy, healthcare, education, protecting the environment, protecting civil liberties, etc. Those are more peaceful, “cooler” issues, that would be more likely to attract more laid back, peaceful types. Same for the Green Party.

I would think if a psychologist devised a test to measure aggressiveness, one would find members of the NRA or an oil-drilling or lumber harvesting association would score higher in that regard than members of the Audobon Society or visitors to an art museum or symphony. Some activities attract more aggressive types. The same can be said for political issues.

[quote=“Mother Theresa”]Maybe it’s that the types of issues that are important to Repubs tend to attract more aggressive/hostile types of people than the types of issues that are important to members of other parties or non-members.

The Democratic party, on the other hand, does not put the military, gun, terror and imposition of “moral values” on others as its primary concerns, instead focusing more on jobs, economy, healthcare, education, protecting the environment, protecting civil liberties, etc. Those are more peaceful, “cooler” issues, that would be more likely to attract more laid back, peaceful types. Same for the Green Party.[/quote]
Yes, the peaceful, kind tree-hugging types of ALF (bombing physicians’ houses for doing animal testing), ELF (burned down the Univ. of Washington (Seattle) Horticultural Research Center, an occupied building, to protest research into faster-growing trees for pulp mills), the AFL-CIO (members shot at Greyhound buses during the bus driver strike, members invaded and trashed Republican campaign offices during the recent election), ACT-UP (instructed members to bite police officers and then refuse to be tested for AIDS, to terrorize officers into not blocking ACT-UP’s other illegal acts). . . . Ah, those peaceful Democraps and Greens.

Getting back to the thread topic, I think the Republicans tend to hate more only because they are not a particularly tolerant, “big tent” bunch by their nature. Look at the demographics of who voted Kerry, and you basically have majorities among women, young people (not set into prejudices by sour life experiences yet), Jews, blacks, and other minorities. Between women, homosexuals, and the racial minorities, you have a whole ton of Americans who have some idea of what it’s like to be discriminated against – people who probably think twice before they jump to hateful ideas about others.

Politics and honesty in the same place? You know that’ll never happen, right?


You have a good point, but I think a valid question to ask would be whether or not most Democrats agree with or support the atrocities you listed. Do you honestly believe they would? As a liberal Democrat myself, and one who knows many, I can tell you I don’t know a single person (liberal or otherwise) who would. Using violence as a solution to problems is not something that the overwhelming majority of liberals agree with.

I think what has been said here does have a lot of validity…but I doubt that the Republican party attracts intrinsically aggressive or hate-filled people so much as the issues themselves illicit these emotions. It does seem that many Republicans (certainly many who post here) view anybody who disagrees with Republican beliefs and values as being treasonous and vile.

Can we hear from some Republicans on this? Do any of you consider yourselves to be morally superior to Democrats and/or other liberals? Do you hate us? Do you consider us evil? As MT did, I mean these as serious questions.

What about hate filled conservative talk back radio? Is there any other kind?

So Gao_bo is assuming Republicans agree with atrocities? Of course…I aim to be atrocious in every facet of my life, don’t you, fellow Republicans? Pah-lee-ze!

You know…as a Republican (who is more centrist, as are many of them) who is still under 30, who has lived his whole life in cities, who has spent the last 3 of 4 years outside the U.S., who has an advanced degree, who is not anti-gay, who is opposed to violence (I have not been in one fist fight in my life), I find this thread to be lacking in real substance. Why?

You could label me as an exception. However, many of the most intelligent, most caring, most considerate people I have ever met in my life (respectable, city-dwelling doctors, professionals, teachers, etc.) have been Republicans. Oh, and guess what…they live in cities. On the other hand, many of the most intolerant people I have met in the last four years have been Democrats. I say four years only because before then, at least for much of my life, it was not so much of a venemous issue. I acknowledge that it has been in the past at times that are before my recall.

My advice to everyone is to stop labeling people. Personally, I despise labels as much as I despise those who start threads putting a whole group of people into a quantitatively baseless, hate-filled category. That’s all.

As a slight correction, I realize that gao_bo said that he doubted most Repubs really were aggressive or hate-filled, but that the issues themselves elicited those emotions, however the point still stands. But in direct response to his note that Republicans think of many Dems as tresonous and vile, I would ask why so many Dems think that Repubs are lowly and unworthy. No matter how you cut it, some people will have bitterness regardless of party affiliation.

Ta Ta

so, the repub’s think the dem’s are a bunch of nasty arses, and vice versa … wow, news flash.

when you meet people, is political affiliation one of the first questions that comes storming outta your mouth? if so, my guess would be that you just dismiss others as wacko from the moment you hear that their politics and yours don’t match up. there are other things you might have in common. and one’s political affiliations don’t necessarily mean that everything else about the people you meet is gold, or shyte.

i think your country (and mine, and many others) would do better finding ways to make things work, and make things better, rather than constantly sniping and low-balling the other side. there are LOTS of assholes on both sides (there always are), but sometimes that’s difficult to see when you are firmly rooted to one side. then the assholish behavior become more acceptable, if it is pro-your-cause.

anyways, my 2 bits …

tomtom… :bravo: :bravo: