For a political attack to really work it was to be truer about your opponent than it is about yourself. That’s why the following makes me laugh:
Republicans are seeking to portray President Obama as the divider-in-chief, arguing the presidential candidate who trumpeted hope and change four years ago is now running an increasingly negative campaign.
Their chief argument is that Obama’s attacks on the wealthy are meant to incite class warfare and a heightened us-versus-them mentality never seen before in present day politics.
But Republicans also point to Democrats’ “war on women” and the contraception mandate in Obama’s healthcare law, which they argue is an attack on religious freedom.
Even the lead-up to the anniversary of the death of Osama bin Laden over the last week was used by a sharp-elbowed Obama to divide the nation, Republicans say.
Mitt Romney, the presumptive GOP nominee, seized on the theme in recent days.
Let’s think about this. Attacking access to contraception is a direct attack on women. Passing laws to make getting an abortion as humiliating as possible is a direct attack on women. Any suggestion that the president doesn’t deserve credit for getting Usama bin-Laden is so ludicrous that it’s only purpose is to divide the nation. Mitt Romney’s harsh anti-Latino positions divide America. Throwing a national security adviser under the bus because he’s openly gay divides America.
The president, on the other hand, is merely asking rich people to put some more money in the treasury so we don’t have to go deeper in debt or put ALL of the hardship of budget cuts on the people who utilize government programs and assistance. And that’s pretty much everyone when you consider education and research and development and transportation spending. Rich people got a giant decade-long gift of low tax rates and now the Republicans want everyone but rich people to pay for the resulting debt. How does that not divide the nation?