Do Democrats Hate Bush as much as they Hated Lincoln?

Question

If you think Democrat hatred toward Bush is extreme today then you should have been alive in the 1860s. Democrats hated Lincoln so much they withdrew from the union and attempted to form their own country when he was elected. They continued to Slander him, saying that he wanted to destroy America, provoke war, etc.

Did history judge Lincoln by what Democrats said about him? No, history did not. History judged Lincoln based on his actions and the freedom he brought to millions. History will judge Bush based on his actions and the freedom he brought to millions. I am proud to have voted for George W. Bush twice and I would vote for him a third time without any hesitation.

Answer 1

Democrats...(not all) but 99% of them hate anything that will push the United States forrward in the world.. They hate anything that is pro-American... Most democrats, i.e. Nancy Palosi, Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, John McCain, and many other governors and Senators, are pro terrorists and very much so anti-American

Answer 2

I kind of like this question. I could take you seriously, and having some conservative tendencies in humor I could say,"Well, according to the electro-physiological radings that were performed on all Slave-owning Democrats of 1860, which were exactly 3,761,232 over the age of 21, the average hate readings were 91.07%." And we'd agree, that's pretty high. and then I could say, if I were a so-called modern conservative, "And when we did the same testing on the skins of every registered Democrat, the readings on hate were..." but by now you know I"m kidding you. I mean, you DO know htis, don't you?
Maybe you don't.
See, I can tell either you just want to WIN by lying to people by assuming that the Democratic party of 1860 is exactly the same as the Democratic party of, say, 2006; that the hateful and evil slavers below the Mason-Dixon line are still at it, under the same name.

Please: I woulld expect you to know the difference between the Republicans of 1860, or even Teddy Roosevelt's time, and today....I mean, you DO know the difference, don't you? I'm not kidding! Roosevelt, Teddy, he of the big stick, the guy who imported martial arts to this country, began the Parks system and saving open land from the greedheads who want to steal minerals cheaply! and the Republicans want to break in and steal, but they aren't the Republican pary of his time, they are the ones wearing the NAME now.
I believe that you and many fine young so-called conservatives are primarily word-oriented. You seem to think that 'Republican" of 1860 or 1900 are the same: in 1900 the Republicans were the ones who were busting up the big corporations who were gouging Americans and killing small businesses, which of course they do today UNDER Republican governments.

Look here: if I say to you, I'm giving you a cadillac for your birthday, you may have a certain picture in your mind...but when the caddillac turns out to be a junked 1955 rusted out windowless hulk, it obviously isn't the same as the picture the word made you make in your head.

And, please, if you want to hang out with serious and capable people, you have to start looking sometimes into your own head: like, what do you mean, hate? I've been around a while, I've seen people DO some terrible things, but nobody ever gave anybody a pound of hate in a bag. You haven't been clear what you mean.If you could tell me what you're THINKING when you say 'Hate,,,'
the pres, etc, maybe I could have a serious talk with you. But because you think that when you say something, like"Dog"...you think that everybody sees in their head the same 'Dog" you do...
and it just isn't so.
There was a funny libertarian rock guy who had a song,"What will you do when the labels come off?" Probably if you saw an evil guy trying to throw a baby over a cliff and he was wearing a sweat shirt that was labelled 'Christ', you'd be smart enough to say, well, he's trying to kill a child...and if he wore a sweat shirt that said, "Rock and Roll" on it, you'd still be smart enough to say, "Hey, we gotta stop him, he's trying to kill somebody..."
But for some reason you haven't shown me that you're smart enough to really deal in categories and subcategories and examples and individuals. With you, it's just words. Are you young, or inexperienced?
Forgive: but you asked.
all the best...
By the way: I didn't vote for either Bush. But I will tell you, as an ex-Green Beret, I do NOT fault him for the war in Iraq. See, I am a liberal, and I believe that a rule of law based on an informed democracy is far better than anything those 22 Arabic nations now experience, and in order to change the outcome from those states, YOU MUST CHANGE THE STATES. Did you get that? That is a VERY liberal idea. That is NOT a conservative idea.
I do think, however, that the theft of a trillion dollars from and lies told to the electorate are more than enough to impeach Bush, and if my so-called leaders in the Democratic party DON'T impeach him, I will run as many of them out of office as I can.
But NOT for Iraq.
See, isn't it interesting? reality is a hell of a lot different that Rusty Limbaugh will tell you...

Answer 3

well responding to the various answers, the problem is the democrats may have despised lincoln, but he was socially right on issues. The problem is the "freedom" bush has brought to people isn't actually freedom. It's the chaotic form of anarchy with a neo-conservative ideological misfit government. In essence, it's like a slave driver with a gun against 10,000 slaves. The other problem is the quality of life has decreased since the collapse of the infrastructure of the Iraqi government. Saddam Hussein was bad, and it's good that we "freed them," but there was no successful reconstruction like there was in the south. In the south Lincoln's administration under his plan successfully united the US again. Our reconstruction plan in Iraq has separated the Sunni and the Shiites and the Kurds. Next, the democrats don't "hate" everything american, and anti communist. Many of the people with Mccarthy were democrats themselves. Also, many people who use the word communist aren't refering to Marx's scientific socialism, but more of an abusive stalism. Finally, America itself isn't a capitalist nation, nor should it ever be. Captialism disenfranchises too many people globally, which is why in the age of globalization the government should only provide for what the market cannot. Furthermore, we should privatize things like the prison system and welfare, because the market could provide it more efficiently. The problem is, education wise, the Federal government shouldn't be involved, but REPUBLICANS like George Bush advocated No Child Left Behind. Finally, if the Democrats aren't anti-American, you just don't agree with them politically. Dissent is essential in a republic, without it we have a dictatorship (which we tried to remove out of Iraq) Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't make them wrong. That's the idea of freedom of speech, and by saying someone hates America because they don't agree with you goes against everything our soldiers have fought for and will ever fight for.

Answer 4

yes in the same way they called Lincoln a warmonger a idiot and so on like bush is being called today. Just thank back 1860 or any other war we had. The Freedom Democrat's or liberals we call today meat with the enemy in secret and tried to undermine the troops etc sound familiar same with the slander now and with Gerald ford Nixon and Regan.

Answer 5

These liberals obviously have something mentally wrong with them.And always had one agenda which is to hate anything remotely connected to conservatism and the Republican Party. Liberals don’t care what good things someone else has done for them, because they have been brain washed into thinking only their Party is good and all others are bad. If you have ever talked to a true liberal for more than an hour – your will realize this mentality is in their DNA.

Answer 6

You need to review the book 'US v Geo W Bush et al' then form an opinion. A vet of the 'Vets Against War in Iraq' stated how used he felt after witnessing the war first hand combat.

Answer 7

I agree with your statement. However, I hope that Bush is acting in the AMERICAN people's best ineterst. Citizens have been overthrowing their leaders for thousands of years. If the iraqi people were that unhappy with their despot ruler - i'm sure they could have done something about it. I'm glad America is trying to help out iraq - i just sometimes worry if we are doing more damage than good. (i probably watch the news too much)

Answer 8

Well lincoln was hated because he wanted to do away with slavery. America especially the south didnt appreciate that.

Anyone who's loved one is over seas for no reason but to satisfy Bush's taste of dominancy should hate him.

I hate him because of the gas prices.

Answer 9

uh you might want to check your history a little bit closer...back in the 1800's the republican and democratic parties were the opposite of what they are now....aka in the 1800's the repubs were the dems and the dems were the repubs....it got flipped in the late 1800's to early 1900's...if you don't believe me, talk to pretty much any history teacher or enthusiast out there...

Answer 10

Comparing Bush to Lincoln is like comparing Apples to Oranges!

Answer 11

The Liberal party supports individual liberty tempered by social responsibility. How could any American think that's a bad thing.