Is it my imagination, or has this post-election period been a hell of a lot more bitter than anyone other one in recent history? Not in "boo-hoo, I'm so sad" or "Gee, I wish I could actually move to Canada like I promisd I would if the bad guys won" or even "This country has turned from God and His wrath will be mighty wrathful" sorts of ways, but more in the "I'm so pissed off over the guy I didn't like winning that I'm going to take it out on his supporters any way I can" sort of manner.
I really don't recall this level of acting out on vitriol after Obama's first win, or either of the Bush wins, or the Clinton wins.
Embedded Link
Arizona Gun Store: No Obama Voters Allowed
A gun shop in Arizona has a clear message to would-be customers who happened to vote for President Barack Obama: take your business elsewhere. The Southwest Shooting Authority in Pinetop, Ariz. to…
Google+: View post on Google+
Well, the whole “moving to Canada” thing that was so popular when the AHCA passed is out now that True Americans (R) [that’s “registered trademark,” not “Republicans”… although…] have learned about Canada’s health care system. But, yeah, they do seem to be taking it personally. It’s as if they cannot believe that they could have lost fairly and squarely.
So far the antics have ranged from dickish to comical. I predict the range will extend to violence before Cons calm down.
Well, if you count the story the other day of the woman who ran over her boyfriend because he hadn't bothered to go vote against Obama, then it already has.
I saw a picture of a restaurant receipt where some jackass could afford $20 worth of cheap beer, but left no tip and wrote "blame Obama". I would follow that jackhole out to his car and give him a what for.
I remember a lot of anger on the leftish side when Bush won, but I don't think we refused to cook barbecue for anyone or laid workers off.
So is it anger? Is it cognitive dissonance? Is it Randian rebellion against any concept of "society"?
It's that last one. Somehow Ayn Rand became the official philosopher of a large chunk of a putatively Christian nation.
How would the wankers know who you voted for?
They wouldn't, unless you said. Faced with such belligerence , your choice is, if asked, to admit you voted for Obama (wit whatever consequences — presumably the "we reserve the right to refuse service" rules apply, and voting decisions are not a protected class), to stay silent (standing on the principle of the secret ballot, which may be interpreted as an Obama vote), or lie.
That presumes, of course, that this is more than a mere publicity stunt to "make a point" or to drum up business or both. But even if that's the case, it's in poor taste to say the least.