sticker shock
I saw the following bumper stickers on 3 different cars over the last few days. I think I would have felt better if it was only ONE car - then I could have written this off as one possibly not-sober individual with an outgoing personality. Rather, these were noted on three seperate cars. I actually had to write them down to make sure I got them correctly:
"Show Me the Plane That Hit The Pentagon. You Can't Do It!"
"I Wish You Had Not Voted For Bush - GOD."
"Katrina didn't exist. Bush flooded the levees. Know the truth. (then some tiny-printed website I could not make out)"
I ask you: who ARE these people that their lives rise and fall on the vilification of ONE MAN (hey guys, he's out of office soon enough and then your misplaced anger will have to be misdirected onto a new target. Start looking around for one now ~ there is always someone available to blame for all that ills us if we look around with that intention)?
And how did I miss the apparently thriving cottage industry of far~fetched~conspiracy~theory bumper~sticker~makers out there until now?
posted by lachen at 4:46 AM
12 Comments:
That better NOT have been your car, Tracy. :)
I so hear you! We recently made a trip to Washington, D.C. where we ended up spending about 4 extra hours in the airport due to scheduling problems. While there we wandered into one of those souvenir shops for people who forgot to buy a junky mug or T-shirt while they were wandering around on the Capitol Mall. I was positively shocked to see that nearly ALL the souvenirs were anti-Bush. The "wake me up in 2008" logo seemed especially popular.
As one who still supports our poor president (I'd like to see someone else try to handle the stuff he's had thrown at him in the last 6 years) -- the rampant hatred of him makes me sad. :(
Angel, A.M.E.N.
The vilification of this President seems unprecedented around these parts lately, and, sadly, Christians are not exempt. It causes me dismay. I cannot believe that Jesus would advocate such openly sharp hatred. It is almost like a sport, isn't it? - wrapping of hostile denegration of GWB, one single human being who has taken on the unenviable job of leading a NATION in the midst of the worst terrorist attack in history and its aftermath, as cleverly as possible and then marketing the new hateful slogan to the masses. Lovely.
It saddens me that there seem so many of us are willing to buy and display such hateful things. Why do we choose to express our opinions in such hateful, mean-spirited, and sometimes just overtly bizarre manners (conspiracy theories a la bumper sticker never fail to amuse me!)? Is it mainly for shock value?Certainly the people who display such things must know that they are preaching to their choirs alone, since they repel others entirely. Maybe that is the point?
I imagine Jesus would be vocal about various decisions GWB has made concerning war, protection of human life from conception, and other big issues facing us. But I know God does not blame natural and man-made disasters on GWB. Give me a break! And isn't it the Lord who teaches us to love one another, and to sharpen one another like iron sharpening iron? Bumper stickers like this are hardly demonstrative of that. An awful lot of people seem to have given up on our President and resigned themselves to just abhor him, content to offer snide remarks and open hatred in whatever form it comes.
Yikes. He's just one man, guys. And he is doing his very best at a job we sent him to do. That position and his earnest effort demands our respect. I don't agree with every position and policy that he has made, but I refuse to lower myself to the level of tossing snide little comments out from the sidelines. We seem to forget respect and love so often in how we raise our voices within the political realm.
Overall, I agree with what you say. The amount of vitriol and hatred dumped on him is lamentable. I think what we see is the same level of hatred and animosity that the GOP leveled during 8 years of the Clinton administration. The hatred then was just as bad. That is the price of such a highly partisan society.
The difference is that the level of world unrest has increased exponentially over the last 5 years. That makes the avenues for venting the hatred more plenteous.
Clinton was not the Anti-Christ. His new global initiative is proof of that. Nor is Bush.
However, I cannot believe that he is doing his best. The complaints against him are real but need to be addressed in as beneficial a manner as possible. That is the dilemma I face when I consider him to be the worst president of my lifetime and possibly the most dishonest.
It's one thing to respect the office but when I feel completely and totally betrayed by an individual I voted for twice it's hard to maintain that level of respect you call for.
Scott, I hear you.
And thanks, by the way (tell Tracy too) for coming here and being vocal and sharing from your heart).
I have heard the argument about Clinton often, and tend to reject it entirely. In my mind, Clinton became as effective a leader as Howdy Doody after the land, S&L, and sex scandals - bereft of the majority of his credibility and moral fortitude. I lost 100% respect for him when he bedded a woman only a few years older than his own daughter and then lied about it to those in positions to hold him accountable. I continue to find his actions and their aftermath responsible for a lot of the lax attitudes our society now faces in its youth about sex, oral sex, and dishonesty. I was a semi-vocal grouch about Clinton - but NEVER did I see, even in my own little circle which was ardently frustrated with his behavior, the level of MALICE, hatred, and desire to vilify one man.
This is new. And it bothers me deeply.
Not until this President has there been this level of unGodly hatred and disdain towards our leader.
I understand what you point out about the current state of the world and the wars we are fighting being potentially responsible for the escalation in response to GWB. I agree - that is the most evident culprit.
But remember - the catalyst for the wars we've entered into in the last 6 years was brought TO US - to our shores via airplanes, less than a year after Bush took office. He did not cause it. He did not even facilitate the process by which such plans were made and executed. And I find his responses to the unprecedented terrorism and carnage within our own country measured, reasonable, and understandable, even as I personally do not agree with some of them. Especially since I do not find him guilty of moral depravity, incompetance, or any of the other ugly accusations routinely tossed into the ring.
I believe he is doing his best, Scott. I challenge anyone to actually prove to me that this man - this human being - is NOT earnestly endeavoring to do what he believes is best for our nation.
I know you disagree.
That we may disagree with his policies, method, or choices is natural. I can't remember ever universally agreeing with anyone I have ever met on all things. But our difference of perception and viewpoint does not make WB a liar, a lunatic, a loser, a lament, or a letch. It just means we disagree. It means I think he is wrong on some pretty important areas. It means I am frustrated often. But we have become rather self-righteous in our choice of expressing that disagreement, if these bumper stickers are any indicator of prevailing sentiment.
Hatred, vilifcation, persecution, and malice are all choices.
And when speaking of the leader of our nation, they are all choices that are vastly inappropriate, deragatory, and don't really accomplish much more than self-satisfaction of anger?
(I am forver disappointed in my inability to be as succinct as I aim to be). :)
I was heavily involved in Republican political circles through the 90's. Being in Tennessee for the majority of that time I can tell you that the hatred was every bit as intense in many of the circles I encountered. Granted, the stuff that culminated in 9/11 had its genesis years before, but regardless of who was president it would have been partisan fodder in this time. That was my point.
I in no way believe that GW, or Clinton, brought that on.
I think that you are right in your main point: hatred is evil no matter the source, focus or justification. We need to pray for GW. Just as we need to pray for Bill, Osama and all leaders of this world.
But praying for and respecting their leadership are two separate things.
You know, there are two things that make Bush seem infinitely more palatable whenever I am tempted to criticize him or his policies:
1) Al Gore.
2) John Kerry.
It could've been worse. A lot worse.
Scott, you're right. "Praying for and respecting their leadership are two different things." Dead on accurate!
I've found that when I begin praying for people over time, I begin to adopt Jesus' heart for them. If I believe we are all praying for our President, I would not be seeing this kind of malicious and hateful speech from fellow Christians - on our cars, from our mouths, in our hearts.
I just find myself wanting to stand against the tide of hate, when aimed in ANY direction. But especially at the leader of my nation, whose job it is to stand in the gap for my family and make the very best decisions he can to protect and preserve our future ability to live freely in this world.
I don't have "GWB" tatooed anywhere, by the way. I take MAJOR issue with him on rather critical elements of his decisions and directions and vision for America. But, as with Clinton, whose moral depravity bothered me MUCH more than GWB's poor decisions, I will not lower myself to the level of disrespect, malice, or hate. I am heartsick that we who choose to be meek (power, harnassed) seem to be in the minority lately.
In my mind, the office, purpose, and dignity of the President of the United States should not be assassinated because people struggle to respect this particular one at any given moment. It degrades us all to express ourselves so maliciously.
I yearn for a kinder, gentler nation, I guess. Especially in stark contrast to an active ideology spreading across the globe that wishes to kill us, it would be admirable if we choose the words with which we speak of our elected leadership a bit more circumspectly. I do not put GWB/ Clinton and Osama Bin Laden/Hitler on the same level of discussion. One set of individuals enters into destructive conflicts only as a last resort. The other seeks nothing more than the conversion or destruction of unworthy segments of humanity.
Lachen, I am trying to do more reading and less commenting but you have touched on an issue that is so important to me, I can't resist adding to the discussion. In my opinion you were close to the heart of the matter when you used the term "ungodly" to refer to the hatred. I will grant that Clinton is more polished, suave, and a better communicator than Bush. He may well be more intelligent and better educated. The difference for me is that Bush seems to genuinly be a man of prayer and faith. Clinton pretended to believe in God when he played to a believing crowd, but always with a smirk and his actions proved he is anything but godly. Allow me to say I love humor and don't mind jokes at the expense of Bush for mispronouncing words, etc. I also don't mind jokes at my expense for blunders. During Clinton's years I enjoyed e-mailed jokes about both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton. The difference, in my opinion, is that folks who do not believe in God can not TOLERATE the existence of people who do. "The darkness shall not comprehend the light". Anybody strongly motivated by homosexual rights, reduced prison time for criminals, government support for parents of illegitimate children, and on and on we could go, will find a common cause in fighting all who represent godly living and accepting responsibility for your actions. In the mind of some in my area of the southeast, the Republican party had become the "christian" party and the Democrats the "heathen" party. I can't go that far since there is plenty of graft, greed, and ungodliness in both parties. And, of course, there are godly democrats. But in aligning with large groups of constituents there seems to be a clear trend of the Democrats choosing to placate those who feel cheated by the establishment (or the "man") and refuse to see that their circumstance are the direct result of their choices or the choices of their parents and grandparents. I voted for Bush twice not because I thought he was the brightest but because he seemed to come nearest to godliness. Why do you think Chavez refers to him as the devil? It is because Chavez is and evil man with grand ambitions who will do whatever he needs to in order to align enough people to further his cause. It is the same within our country but we are afraid as Christians to label evil people as just that. Tolerance is Christianity's worse enemy in this century. Tolerance of imperfection = good, tolerance of choosing evil = bad.
Roxy - will you marry me? :)
Kidding...
You have hit the heart of truth with such grace and accuracy. WOW. much of what you wrote could have come from my own pen/keyboard.
Yesterday, I was blessed to read Ryan Dobson's "Be Intolerant" which illustrates this point acutely for a modern youth audience(quick and easy read - took me about 90 minutes, which addresses the nuances of tolerance and intolerance that are aspects of a godly character.
And you're EXACTLY right: I voted for Bush, twice, because I saw hiw heart for Christ. I also see his raw edges, his lack of suave communication style (especially evident when contrasted against his immediate predecessor), his imperfections, his "missing the mark". But in him, I still see a heart that seeks after God.
Which is why I feel so pained when I see our President, as a person and public servant, ridiculed, denigrated, and mailiciously attacked ~ whether by bumper sticker, op ed piece, or political speech to the UN or before Congress.
Hi Lachen-I hope that this is a great day for you. Bryan at Hot Air had a theory which I thik has some validity.
First, President Bush was hated from 2000 on by the Dems who just coudn't let go of the fact that Al Gore wouldn't continue the Clinton policies.
When 9-11 happened, and the world woke up to the fact that adherents of Islam want to destroy our culture, many became non-plussed, unable to even comprehend that threat, the danger from what they considered a religion of Peace. They focus instead on a single man, George Bush, whom they already didn't like. They could emotionally deal with seeing him as a threat, an evil person, so in effect he is the straw man, the stand in for the evil they can't come to grips with, Islam.
hahahaha! thats so true. people completely misplace their anger. theyll say the same things ab the next president. sigh.
your comments are like novels in themselves.
Post a Comment
<< Home