I think most Dems don't hate their country so much as they hate the way it's being run. And with Republicans (for all intents and purposes) "in control" of the government, there's little the Dems can do to effect positive change. About all they can do is point out fallacies of the administration and urge them to correct them, which is what they're doing.

To criticize the government does not mean you hate it. Usually it's quite the opposite. It means you care enough about it to save it or protect it. If you hate something, and things are going wrong with it, why would you to try to help improve it? If you hate it, you want it to go down in flames, yeah?

Republicans are no better off than the democrats at this point in time.
Both parties are loosing touch with the reality that currently exists for most americans.

Currently the president is sitting idly by while several of our largest industries are flailing and going down in flames. Why is the government allowing this to go on? We continue to follow bad foreign relations with even worse foreign relations. We cannot stand alone in the world, and desperately need the help that we often brush off, in our brash insistence to do things "our" way.

I find it ironic that our democratic republic that stands for freedom, individual liberty and civil rights is continously in a struggle to restrict rights, stifle free speech and spy on its citizens, all the while telling other countries they need to allow personal freedoms, adopt and promote freedom and civil rights. Do as I say but not as I do?

Food for though.

I don't understand this mentality; of course we can disagree with each other without hurting this country. Disagreement isn't exactly a new concept in democracies or in our government, at least contemporary politicians aren't having disputes a la Burr/Hamilton. How is it unpatriotic and harmful to soldiers to demand that we have more compelling evidence for going to war and sending these people into harm's way? To me, using trumped up intelligence reports to go to war wasn't reason enough for 2,000+ soldiers to lose their lives. Once we become intolerant of dissenters, there isn't much to separate us from those we're fighting against.

I think it's an exaggeration to claim that the "majority of people" agree with Bush et al especially considering the popular votes in the last two presidential elections.

jspeer wrote:

---

He was elected president...which means most people agree with him....unless you believe that crap about the election being fixed.

---

I didn't say anything about a fixed election; I was pointing out the difference between the popular vote and the electoral college. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 and, if I remember correctly, the popular vote was very close to being 50/50 in 2004. In my mind that does not constitute the majority of Americans agreeing with him.