It's the same as it has ever been. People are biased. Very much so. When they are biased in favor of a politician they make all sorts of excuses in his defense, explain why he had to do whatever he did, explain why it was the right thing to do...etc...ad infinitum. Why? Because they believe he's RIGHT!

When they are biased against a politician they attack everything from his looks to his wardrobe to the way he talks to the things he did and said...and they do not TOLERATE any flaw they can uncover or imagine they have uncovered about him. You could say they go berserk in their bloodlust to utterly discredit and destroy the man. Why? Because they believe he's WRONG (and is a threat to their existence in some way).

Now, this enthusiasm for personal hatred doesn't speak too well for most of us, does it? Isn't it just a bit small-minded?

I think we would be better served protesting POLICIES we disagree with rather than engaging in endless innuendo, hatred, and character assassination toward individuals toward whom we were prejudiced from the start anyway.

How well would most of us do if entrusted with running the USA from the executive office? I wonder.

My objection to George Bush is not that I think he's stupid (I don't actually know that he is), not that he can't pronounce "nuclear" (does it matter?), and not a bunch of other stuff like that. My objection is that I disagree with his foreign and domestic policy in a number of pretty critical ways. I disagree with his philosophy, it seems. This does not mean I have to hate him on a personal basis.

As for Clinton, the only other president I have seen attacked with the sort of vitriol he received was Nixon in his second term. It passed all point of decency with Clinton. No human being should be grilled about his private sex life in such a manner in a public forum, when his sex life has little or nothing to do with public policy decisions.

Hating these guys achieves nothing, folks. At least, nothing useful. Opposing a mistaken policy, however, may achieve something quite useful in the long run...if enough people oppose it vigorously enough.

Remember that competing political parties make it their business to get you to focus on personalities...rather than on matters of substance....and they also make it their business to ridicule and denigrate their opponents and encourage public hatred and ridicule of them. This is no way to build a stable and healthy society. It's low and mean.

And it's damned silly. It leads nowhere but to bitterness and endless conflict, and it obscures what's really going on in the USA and in the World at large.

I think when it comes to matters of real substance that the Reagan administration did almost incalculable damage to the North American financial system...and as a result of that...to the whole world society. But that's just my opinion. It is not based on hating Ronald Reagan, who, all in all, seems like a nice enough man to me, but a man seriously out of touch in some ways. I don't think he was mentally fit, at least in his second term. Again, my opinion, that's all.

- LH