It is becoming increasingly apparent that support for Bush's policies in Iraq is not partisan.?

Question

Many conservatives have had it with his policies. It is very evident that members of his own party in Congress have completely lost faith in his ability to lead our country, as evidenced on the news daily. Why, then, does the minority of the public who supports him in his "Iraq policy" always label his opposition as "libs" and other derogatory terms they reserve for Democrats, implying that his opposition is some fringe element of society?? Serious question. Please explain why you think this is true. I would specifically appreciate serious answers from the people I have described here. Why the mischaracterization of Bush's opposition?

Thanks Benny, and thanks for your service there. I guess I may not have been clear. I am speaking of people in the public who run around saying that people who oppose Bush in Iraq are "uber liberals", "Hippies", even just Democrats?? Are they simply UNAWARE? Because that seem simpossible to me. The implication that small group of extremists think Bush is completely incapable in Iraq seems disingenuous to me. I just wanted to know why those people do that. I appreciate your input, know you are providing a great service and hope you come home safely.

Thanks Richard. Please allow me to clarify that MANY of us against this war agree there is a job to do in Iraq, (of course it can't be left to the wind) but think this is not a military issue, something that is becoming increasingly apparent with the fact that we aren't "winning" and seem to have little control over doing anything but quelling violence in neighborhoods every now and then, and when we leave, they come back. And I think labels ARE important. I believe when someone applies a false and offensive label, it damages the credibility of their "argument", especially when they don;t present one. Thanks for your comment.

Morph- I am in complete agreement.

Answer 1

To me, it seems that any president doesn't have a chance. I'm not protecting Bush. But it seems that the political parties main objectives is to find dirt on each other, instead of doing the job that they were elected for. Then the media has a feeding frenzy with it all, if you can believe anything the media tells you. All this, instead of trying to get out elderly free prescriptions.....or increasing the health benefits (that really suck) for our veterans.

Answer 2

It seems pretty clear that the entire case for the conflict has completely unravelled, and the pro-government media has degenerated into mindless name-calling and hate-spewing. It's childish and is not becoming of most first world countries, let alone the richest one on the planet.

I have a lot of conservative ideals, but I'm not really too interested in having a label and I don't think many other people are - most of my ideas overlap, like everyone else's. But if I oppose the conflict, all of a sudden I am a 'leftist liberal' or a 'commie libtard'. How can this be so, when even the generals themselves are expressing their own distance from the white house and the president himself?

Something is very wrong in America today. Something is wrong when most Bush supporters are hateful in their approach to other users, something is wrong if people do not believe Saddam is dead because the media has become so untrustworthy, something is wrong if there is a massive troop deployment even if there is no real support from any direction, except from the few remaining lapdogs of the administration who are calling on people to unite against 'dissent'.

Answer 3

Regardless of party, I think anyone who thinks we should leave Iraq without finishing the job just doesn't understand the consequences.
If his opposition is labeled as Libs or as Idiots matters not, the fact is, if we leave too soon, the casualties we have taken there will seem minor compared to the casualties we will see HERE!
http://usawakeup.org

Answer 4

some fringe element of society