Why are USA Republicans so gung-ho?

Question

It is an education to read the comments on this website. The answers from right-wing Americans are usually really vicious and nasty and abusive, and the hatred they feel for people who do not share the same point of view - especially liberals - is extremely strong. Why is this? And why are they always so keen to bomb other people? It's a bit over the top.

Answer 1

Why are libtards so out of touch? You goofy sons a beothces slay me....with your hiding and wanting to surrender all the time. Go get jobs or something and lets leave running the country to the grown ups.

Answer 2

I worry about American politics. In no other developed country have I seen a more venomous style of 'debate', and it's underlined by the 'he started it!' style discussion on here.

In the UK and many other EU nations, a lot of people are also passionate about political issues, but go about it without the petty name-calling and the offensive remarks. We can stop debating an issue, even a big one, not resolve it, and then go and have a drink together, and talk about something else as friends.

I don't know who started it in the US, but it's definitely worse than it was ten years ago. The aggression between the Left and the Right is extreme and unpleasant.

The holier-than-thou attitude of American Left is disrespectful and is only matched by the sheer hatred the Right feels towards the Left.

The moment terms like 'liberal' become dirty words is the point where you have real problems.

And it's not helped by a biased television media, seemingly with their own political agendas and allegiances. If you cannot 'trust' what you are watching you will end up watching news coverage that tells you what you want to hear (Iraq scandals on the Left, stories about immigrants on the Right, for example.)

Answer 3

Well now slow down there. In the course of that educating read thru this website did you not also come across an equal number of vicious nasty & abusive statements by liberals aimed at republicans, especially our President? My experience has been that such statements are quite plentiful, and disregarding that obvious fact makes this question itself rather one sided does it not?

If on the other hand you are troubled by both sides being at each other's throats with little regard for minor details like facts, well in that I'd agree. The advesarial behavior by people all over this website & all over this country is quite disgraceful. It is one thing to stand up for what one believes in & to debate in reasonable respectful terms seeking a solution for the good of our country, but things have ggotten quite out of hand over the last 15-20 years and it is only getting worse as time goes on.

As to your wholly other topic of military force... You don't believe do you that we can be isolationists in a modern world? Precisely because we are economically diplomatically & militarily powerful we have a responsibility to the world to see justice done, and justice is not always peaceful, indeed the act of enforcing justice is inherently abrasive at best. It is generally best to avoid war, but do understand that the most progress is made in the shortest period by the most dramatic means. You don't have to agree with the policy decisions, but do understand that no one supports them out of a condesending lack of concern for human life. We all want to win & come home, but to come home before we win gurantees more lives will be lost in the long run. Again, you don't have to agree, but there are very strong reasons backed by all of human history to show that we should take action when appropriate & stay the course regardless of cost. I don't say that lightly, I've lost friends in this war & stood the line myself. That's probably more than most of the people up here calling folks warmongers can say.

Answer 4

Republicans have always been pro-military. While liberals were always against having large military force. Since each party has its own opinion on how to do things, therefore, Republicans are against the liberals.

Republicans arent the only ones to do the nasty things. Democrates have done their share too. Its only because we have Republicans in the office now that we see that stuff from them.

Answer 5

Most of the right wing conservatives are of the fundamental christian bent. And event though christians are supposed to love everyone, these psychopaths hate anything that disagrees with their ideals...especially the liberals. I would say that the reason that the right wing is so hateful is due to their religious beliefs, ironically.

Answer 6

That's funny. The nastiest must insulting replies are from caring nurturing Democrats and especially blacks. You are so keen to impede free speach and squelch other points of view. You might remember that FDR JFK LBJ and BJ were war mongers. You guys seen to overreact to everything.

And talk white, dammit, that's "gung-whore".

Answer 7

I don't know where you get your info, but you really need to look at a variety of sources to get a fair-minded view of the world. I know a lot of liberals who have launched some vicious attacks from this web site also.

Answer 8

The reason for their zeal is that they have God on their side. Thing is, their God has horns.

The nouveau Republicans (those whom continue supporting the Party line, regardless of the facts and their faults) are older, miserable, misinformed, and likewise out of step with society as a whole. They'd rather keep their heads in a hole (not unlike their butts) and long for the days when Ronald Reagan walked the Earth. And considering the disasters that we have with George Bush, I kinda do too!

Answer 9

liberals are far more vicious, only it's allowed in public more for them... us vicious conservatives are forced to make our views known on the internet for fear of mobs of rioting idiot college kids...

Here's just the latest in a series of whacked out liberals in high positions being beyond vicious:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005504.htm
here are some more:
http://www.rightwinged.com/2006/04/unhinged_teachers_professors_o_1.html

How about Al Gore shouting "George Bush betrayed his country" or all of the other comments you've heard out of people who made a stronger WMD case than Bush, calling him a liar now. These are party leaders, etc. This sort of behavior is only allowed to come from the left's leaders because if a righty strays in to that arena the liberals sick their media on them.

How about the whole liberal "Buck Fush" thing, or all the other plays on his name "shave bush", etc. Just to barely scratch the surface of the left.. How about insinuating that Bush was behind 9/11... or that everytime we get a big victory in Iraq or the war on terror, leading liberals conspiracy theorize that Rove was behind the timing, etc. etc. etc.

******************
UPDATE

Nice try to answerer MonkeyBoy below, but the liberals have a monopoly on hate.... Not only do my couple links just scratch the surface of day after day of venemous hate we see from the left... But the Democratic Party Chairman said:

"I HATE Republicans and everything they stand for", In addition to many other off the wall statements, a few of which are listed here:
http://www.rightwinged.com/deanslist.html

***************
UPDATE:
Paul C said: "I worry about American politics. In no other developed country have I seen a more venomous style of 'debate', and it's underlined by the 'he started it!' style discussion on here."

Paul, I take it you've never watched the hilarious videos of and read the stories about men (and women) in parliaments of Russia, Taiwan, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, Ukraine, Turkey, Georgia, S. Korea, India, and Nicaragua (to name a few) brawling when the debate gets heated... Yes, physically knock down drag out huge fist fights erupt. And that is just scratching the surface, not even getting in to uncivilized debate.... It would be a cliche and probably over the top to say "you hate America", based on your comments. But you have to be a "blame America" first type, based on what you said when you clearly never bothered to look around at the rest of the world. Don't be so quick to attack America as essentially the worst in the world when it comes to political discourse, when you don't have the facts... unless you're hanging around somewhere like the DailyBS, there is usually someone around like me to straighten you out.

Answer 10

My experience is that both sides can be pretty unsympathetic to the other side. I think "Moral Politics" by George Lakoff sheds a lot of light on this subject.

Lakoff argues that the differences in opinions between progressives and conservatives follow from the fact that they subscribe with different strength to two different metaphors about the relationship of the state to its citizens. Both, he claims, see governance through metaphors of the family.

Conservatives would subscribe more strongly and more often to a model which he calls the "strict father model" and has a family structured around a strong, dominant "father" (government), and assumes that the "children" (citizens) need to be disciplined to be made into responsible "adults" (financially and morally responsible beings). However, the "children" are "adults", and so the "father" should not interfere with their lives: the government should stay out of the business of those in society who have proved their responsibility.

In contrast, Lakoff argues that progressives place more support in a model of the family, which he calls the "nurturant parent model," based on "nurturant values", where both "mothers" and "fathers" work to keep the essentially good "children" away from "corrupting influences" (pollution, social injustice, poverty, etc.).

A "strict father" family revolves around the parents teaching their children how to be self-reliant and self-disciplined through "tough love". This is correlated with the following views:

***Morality: Evil is all around us, constantly tempting us. Thus, the basis of morality is strong moral character, which requires self-reliance and self-discipline. The primary vices are those that dissolve self-discipline, such as laziness, gluttony, and indulgent sexuality.
***Child development: Children develop self-discipline, self-reliance, and other virtues primarily through rewards and punishment, a system of "tough love". Since parents know the difference between right and wrong and children still do not, obedience to the parents is very important. Moral development basically lasts only as long as childhood; it's important to get it right the first time, because there is no "second chance".
***Justice: The world may be a difficult place to live, but it is basically just; people usually get what they deserve. The difficulties in one's life serve as a test to sort the deserving from the undeserving.

A "nurturant parent" family is one that revolves around every family member caring for and being cared for by every other family member, around open communication between all parties, and around everyone pursuing their own vision of happiness. It is also correlated with the following views:

***Morality: The basis of morality is in understanding, respecting, and helping other people, and in seeking the happiness of one's self and of others. The primary vices are selfishness and anti-social behavior.
***Child development: Children develop morality primarily through interacting with and observing good people, especially good parents. Punishment is necessary in some cases, but also has the potential to backfire, causing children to adopt more violent or more anti-social ways. Though children should, in general, obey their parents, they will develop best if allowed to question their parents' decisions, to hear justifications for their parents' rules, etc.. Moral development is a life-long process, and almost no one is so perfect as not to need improvement.
***Justice: The world is not without justice, but it is far from the ideal of justice. Many people, for example, do not seem properly rewarded for their hard work and dedication. We must work hard to improve everyone's condition.

As to why liberals and conservatives view each other's as incomprehensible on an issue-by-issue basis, Lakoff claims the trouble lies in each side not grasping the other side's worldview, and how different it is from its own. Failure to do so results in both sides thinking the other is hopelessly irrational and immoral; an obviously unfortunate state of affairs.

Answer 11

it is all a matter of perception / perspective. for example, al gore seems to have a personality when you compare him to a dead fish. therefore, you bed wetting, bleeding heart liberals are so far left that anybody who is less liberal than yourselves must be nasty, abusive and vicious.