ROEPER: Clinton-haters vs. Bush-bashers? No contest

[wndycty]

Clinton-haters vs. Bush-bashers? No contest

June 16, 2004

BY RICHARD ROEPER SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

-snip-
Understand, I'm not denying the existence of more than a few liberals who truly hate President Bush. Whether it's an idiot singer saying Bush should have died instead of Reagan; photoshopped images of Bush and Cheney as Nazis; Web sites filled with personal insults; or conspiracy theorists accusing the Bush family of participating in a ludicrously diverse litany of crimes up to and including the assassination of JFK, there's some nasty, unfair, off-the-wall stuff out there. Even if you abhor everything about the Bush presidency, this is not the way for decent human beings to campaign against his re-election.

But in volume and variety of rumor-mongering, the Bush-haters aren't even in the same league with the Clinton-haters. I'd say that for every anti-Bushite who's ticked because we didn't find weapons of mass destruction, there were a dozen anti-Clintonites who spent a good chunk of the 1990s screaming, "IT'S NOT ABOUT SEX, IT'S ABOUT LYING UNDER OATH!"

And for every Bush-basher who whispers about the president's "unstable" behavior in the White House, there were a dozen Clinton-haters going around saying it was a "known fact" that the president was a rapist.

And a cokehead.

And a murderer.
-snip-

http://www.suntimes.com/output/roeper/cst-nws-roep16.html

[Screaming Lord Byron]

1. OMG! Richard Roeper hates Morrissey!

Call Fenris!

[Dogmudgeon]

4. Morrissey?

I thought he was talking about Babs (Streisand)!

--bkl
Heaven knows, I'm miserable now.

[Fenris]

18. I'll kill him! Bastard!

:D

[LTR]

2. Roeper nailed it!

These same goons that chastise those who dislike Bush ARE the same ones who trashed Clinton mercilessly.

They have shown their true colors.

[Solly Mack]

7. You know, that picture never fails to make my skin crawl.

gawds..

[LTR]

10. Glad you like it

Though I may remove it if it horrifies too many.

I assuem you're talking about the Babs pic.

[Solly Mack]

17. Nah...keep it

Barbara Bush should cause my skin to crawl...

[kaitykaity]

15. That Babs picture is sexist and disgusting.

I'm so sick of you guys demeaning Republican
women for their looks.

It's really pathetic. Can't you be a little bit
more intelligent and creative, or must you always
go for the lowest, crudest, sickest, most cro-Magnon
man insult?

:puke:

[LTR]

16. I just put it up because I thought it was hilarious!

Sorry, but I have a Cro-Mag sense of humor.

I've got a vote on it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=1281575&mesg_id=1281575

[bbernardini]

3. Just sent him a "thank you" message.

I also pointed out that a bunch of Freepers will probably mount a campaign to have him fired for pointing out their hypocrisy. Just you wait... :)

[tandot]

5. I emailed him to thank him.

What a great article.

Thanks, wndycty, for posting!

[chiburb]

6. I don't like Roeper, but...

He absolutely nailed this one! This is a keeper and a kicker...

[KharmaTrain]

8. Roeper Is With Us More Often Than Not

He's been cynical of this regime all along and I think we'll see some real gems roll from him in the months ahead...this is just the first.

Good thing is his mentor now is Roger Ebert who is one of the best Op/Ed writers at the Sun-Times.

Cheers!

[wndycty]

9. Yes. . .

. . .Rich and I have a few mutual friends and I have worked with him a number of times. His politics are very similar to ours however he is more pragmatic and very cynical. . .after all he is a journalist.

[KharmaTrain]

11. I've Met Him...A Great Guy To Chat With

Yes, he's a a reporter first and a columnist second...meaning he puts the known facts ahead of the conjecture or his own personal feelings. And, face it, until the beginning of this year, one had to be very tempered on what you say and how you said it. I was working on a post of how these times follow a Repugnican period of repression whenever they get control of the government...and here's a great example.

Roeper has to watch his step since he's sitting in Siskel's chair (another great and missed progressive!) and both he and Roger have to watch what they say lest it's made into a controversy that gets their show thrown off the air. He has to deal with the Sinclairs out there, thus discretion carries into everything he says or prints.

But I get a feeling he's sensing what a lot of us are...it's not only OK to start speaking out, it's time! The fun in the weeks and months ahead is to watch the media ground shift.

[Cat Atomic]

12. Yeah, people hate Bush because of his policies. Republicans

hated Clinton because they were told to.

[Brotherjohn]

13. Good for Roeper. But it's even less of a contest than he says.

I suppose he has to play the middle ground a bit.

But as for "conspiracy theorists accusing the Bush family of participating in a ludicrously diverse litany of crimes up to and including the assassination of JFK", that stuff is still so far out of the mainstream that WE don't even see much of it, and we're DU (according to the Freepers, we're the worst "Bush-haters" out there!). Yet we heard accusations that Clinton (or Hilary) killed Vince Foster and others on a daily basis on talk radio and Fox News for 8 years. Hell, we're STILL hearing it!

The things I see accusations out there about Bush regard a large-scale, ongoing war, false justifications for that war, repeatedly spreading big lies (such as the linking of Iraq to 9-11 that continues to this day), the outing CIA operatives responsible for tracking WMDs...

You know, actual actions by the sitting White House that are widely known and done as part of everyday policy. Not decade-old land deals and private, consensual affairs and such.

You can argue whether the actions of the Bush administration are worth it or not, or are criminal or not. But you cannot argue that a CIA agent was outed by the White House, that we went into Iraq BY CHOICE based on what is now known to be dubious evidence, that the Bush administration continues to link Iraq and 9-11 even thought Bush himself, when asked point blank, has been forced to admit that the Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. You also cannot argue that the actions of the Bush administration, for better or worse, have directly resulted in thousands of deaths.

These actions are indisputable. Whether these actions are for better or for worse is just the argument we are having, and being on the anti-Bush side of that argument is not "Bush hatred". It is exactly what an opposition, and an election, should be about.

[Killarney]

14. He's right!

[Catherine Vincent]

19. That guy is 100% correct!

I have said all along that the so called Bush-haters pales in comparison to the Clinton-haters. The Clinton-haters wrote the book on hate. If some republican ever mention bush-hate to me, I always bring up how we learned from the best and the best was Clinton-haters. I plan to send this guy an email...he deserves a thank you.