A question about American politics, from a foreigner

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
Unlike the previous Administration which bent over backwards to include the Democrats when the Administration set policy. ;)
Well, see, this is evidence now of my previous point. The Bush admin DID try to do exactly that, with multiple issues. The quickest example is the infamous No Child Left Behind Act, which Bush is blamed for, yet was--in fact--written by a Dem and did--in fact--receive as much or more support from Dems in the House than Repubs.
 

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
3,781
Age
50
Location
MA
Website
www.rebeccaburrell.com
Anybody remember that Pixar short that was shown at the beginning of Monsters, Inc where there were some little birds on a wire pecking at a bigger bird's toes, until they all went slingshotting into space when the bigger bird fell off?

That's kinda how I see American politics at the moment.
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,833
Location
Limbo
To be fair dclary, as an outsider, the OP and Sleepsheep's assertions seem to be dead on.

I think the main problem is the ascerbic talking heads that can be seen as the face of the Republican party (as least to me across the water). Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh etc. all seem to indicate that whoever shouts the loudest is the best Republican.

I honestly hope you say that I am wrong and point me in the direction of some more reasoned debaters. I'd honestly love to see a considered and thoughtful Republican pundit.

This is the huge problem right here. The democrats really don't have super big personalities that represent 'the party' like the Republicans (GOP) do. So it is easier for the GOP to be perceived as extremists simply becuase their talking heads can be right winged nuts sometimes (though to be fair, I do think OReilly is not that bad).

Another factor that has help skew the GOP is that saying 'absolute power corrupts absolutely'.

Unfortunately, while on Bush's watch (incidentally when the GOP controlled the white house and Congress) you had 9/11 happen. 9/11 warped our politics in a way akin to how a black hole warps the laws of physics.

9/11 enabled the GOP to act relatively unopposed and 9/11 gave the GOP alot of leeway and influence upon which to 'take control' and act.

The net result was that the extremists within the GOP were able to really sink their talons in and push the party further to the right.

Now, the GOP is fighting to find their soul. And in this fight, they unilaterally are opposing all things Democrat. Granted, this has always been the norm, but now, it seems they are doing so with more vigor than usual.

IMHO, I think part of the reason is due to guilt. Things went horribly wrong during their watch and if the Democrats are able to 'fix' things ,then that will just highlight how 'wrong' the GOP was. So, you have a wierd passive agressive sabotage going on.

THen there is simple denial and insanity. The GOP has taken up various right wing 'mantras' and would rather fall on their swords than admit a democrat resolution may actually be the best course.

So they galvanize around words like "Death Panels" and "Socialists" , put their hands to the ears and scream "Na-na-na-na-na" until the debate has been effectively filibustered.

It is my belief that the GOP would rather see the country fall of the edge of a cliff than have a Democrat be successful in fixing it.

Mel...
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
I think there has been a resurgence of the very far right wing, and although they are a minority, they are the most vocal and passionate, as people on the extremes usually are, right or left.

The Republican party has been losing adherents, and so they are loathe to alienate any of their members. So the moderate Republicans remain quiet when those on the right push their agenda.

The Republicans used to be a centrist party, and the Democrats somewhat leftist. Now, it's the Dems who are basically centrist, and the Republicans who have swung toward the edge.

And, conservatives are basically defenders of the status quo. The world is changing, very fast. Outsourcing and the disappearance of manufacturing, the collapse of the auto industry, the rapid change in the demographics of our population -- all these things are very frightening, and people who are scared often react with anger, looking for someone or something to blame it all on.

One of the most telling things, i think, during the town hall protests, was the anger. And it wasn't really anger about health care. Health care was just a flashpoint. People are doing things that have nothing to do with health care -- carrying guns and signs depicting Obama as Hitler, for example. One woman, to loud applause, was taped screaming with obvious frustration: "I want my country back!" She sees the world changing and it scares her. She does not like it, not one bit.

I just finished an 11 hour drive yesterday, and I listened to two hours of Rush Limbaugh. At first it was amusing, since I think the man is a loon and devoid of logic. But after a while, it became disturbing. The sheer viciousness of his rants, the constant attacks -- they all had the same message -- that "they" are destroying our country, that "they" (and Obama in particular as the president,) are evil people whose single minded mission is to destroy the American way of life. Very little was about policies being misguided or mistaken. The message was that it's all deliberate -- it's "us" against the evil "them" and "they" must be stopped at all costs.

It resonates, it whips up anger, and imo, political violence is right around the corner.
 

DavidZahir

Malkavian Primogen
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
2,095
Reaction score
268
Location
Los Angeles
Website
undeadwhispers.yuku.com
Let us be fair--the tactics being discussed (and rightly criticized) are not the stuff of all Republicans, nor even of all Republican politicians nor all Republican leaders. But the seemingly most influential members of the Republican Party do seem to have adopted an extreme form of partisan-ship that caters to the worst in the American body politic.

And I'll give examples...

The incredibly vicious things coming out of Anne Coulter's mouth, including a call to murder the staff of the New York Times, publicly fantasizing about denying women the vote, her call for racial profiling and for a World War aimed at conquering the Middle East to force its inhabitants to convert to Christianity--which, given her nonsense about "perfecting the Jews" I think might just include Israel, etc.

Rush Limbaugh and others like Lou Dobbs who actually encourage the Birther nonsense (there's a whole thread about that on this forum). I would also like to point out Limbaugh scoffed at the idea that Colin Powell could possibly have supported Barack Obama for any reason other than race. Think about that for a moment.

Bill O'Reilly--a man who evinced surprise that a restaurant in Harlem was just like an eatery anywhere else (!?!?). Although not nearly as conservative as many believe (he accepts global warming, for instance, and is in favor of gay adoption), this man also has a history of telling lies (although he might well believe his fantasies) about a range of subjects including a notorious incident during WWII in which he claims US soldiers tortured SS POWs, when in fact it was the SS who murdered a bunch of GIs who had surrendered.

Months ago, I watched an interview on The Young Turks in which someone on Buchanan's Presidential campaign staff insist the way to have a real dialog on racial issues in this country is for minorities to stop complaining or even talking about it(!)

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann. OMG, what can we say about her? She called for investigations into "un-Americanism" on the part of members of Congress, then denied it. She urges her constituents not fill out census forms because the government will...I dunno, have accurate facts about the country to go on? There's more. Look her up.

Congresswoman Virginia Fox, who denied in front of Matthew Shepherd's mother that her son had been murdered because he was gay, and when confronted by the facts in an interview refused to admit she was wrong--and has also been on the bandwagon of telling lies about Health Care Reform (she actually said the Democratic plan would have the government putting old people to death). Plus she voted not to extend the Voting Rights Act and voted against federal aid to the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Sarah Palin. Dear god. Her and her "death panels" and her "real America" and so on.

Dick Cheney, the former vice president who--it turns out--not only thought torture was just find and dandy, wanted to use US troops to arrest suspects on American soil. Who thought it shameful that a member of his staff who broke the law should only get a commuted sentence rather than a full pardon! Oh, and who decries all the "tell all" books about the Bush administration (except for his own of course).

When the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress just a few years ago, they treated the Democrats as poor cousins whose opinions and votes didn't count. They had a majority, and pushed through bill after bill that many objected to. Now that they are a much smaller minority than the Democrats ever were, GOP members of Congress are demanding 80 votes in the Senate to pass Health Care Reform. Meanwhile, as a group they are telling lie after lie after lie about the proposals on the table. "Death Panels" and benefits for illegal immigrants are just two of their popular deceits.

For the record, I am not claiming the Democrats are saints. Nor do I deny that the Opposition is supposed to serve as a counter-balance to the Majority. What I am pointing out is that some (if not most) of the loudest voices in the Republican Party at the moment are spewing lies and hatred and acting in anything but good faith.
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,833
Location
Limbo
As for working with the Dems to run the country, its been the Dems repudiating Republican input. Since the Dems have a majority, they don't feel particularly disposed to having to work with Republicans.

I'm not so sure about this.

Republican input hasn't been so much input as its been dictates and ultimatums.

When 9/11 happened, and the Republicans were in charge, Dems basically gave Republicans the support/leeway they needed.

Now that the tables are turned (Dem are in charge), and it is the economy that is the emergency, I find it repugnant that the GOP isn't supporting the Democrats like the Democrats supported them 8 yrs ago.

In fact, the GOP has dug their heels in and opposed the democrats about as effectively as one could hope for at every turn.

THe only thing worse than not doing anything is doing it half assed. And based on GOP opposition, all of these measures being passed are half assed measures, at least that is my perception.

I oscillate between Dems and GOP becuase we need both perspectives. But I'm disappointed with the GOP opposition. It seems like they aren't even giving Obama a 'chance' before declaring how wrong he is. At least Bush got a few years worth of chances. But Obama? Right out of the gate, he's the evil Socialist who must be stopped at every turn.

Mel...
 

shawkins

Ahhh. Sweet.
VPX
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
2,739
Reaction score
848
Location
The business end of a habanero pepper IV
Let me just start by saying that I'm not doing this to group people under the same hat, insult anyone, host an argument, or invite hyperbole. I'm just a foreigner who occasionally catches a glimpse of the American media, and is left puzzled by something:

Can someone explain to me what the deal is with the Republican Party these days?
I don't exactly go out of my way to witness these kinds of thing, but everything I see from the right-wing media and commentators is laden with this smarmy nastiness that is frankly embarrassing to see come from adults.

Equating criticism of president Bush with treason, over-the-top nationalism, hypocrisy, fear-and-hate mongering, vague racism, and a determined effort to stand against the left-wing and do everything to make them look bad, rather than . . . you know . . . focus on fixing their own internal problems and maybe actually working with the Dems to run the country effectively.

And it's all so blatant! So filled with obvious bias and arrogance and rabble-rousing. From my (admittedly limited) viewpoint, it seems like the Republicans have adopted a policy of appealing to the very meanest, dumbest and angriest of their countrymen. Which I just don't get.

Any thoughts?

I think the answer comes in two parts:

1. Human nature. Partisan hyperbole and rabble rousing can be entertaining. I'll assert without proof that a thorough and nuanced discussion of the real issues underlying, say, the economic crisis would lie well below the threshold of boredom of most voters.

2. Up until 1987, American broadcast TV used to be regulated by something called the Fairness Doctrine. That was a rule that said, basically, in order to get a license to broadcast over the public airwaves, you had to at least make an effort to present both sides of an issue. Likewise, blatant advocacy of one party or the other by a news show was largely forbidden (you did get the occasional editorial). The Fairness Doctrine was done away with in 1987, which made blatantly slanted news programming legally permissible.

Shortly thereafter, the strategy of setting up a news network as a thinly disguised propaganda organ was proven to be quite successful both politically and financially.
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,833
Location
Limbo
Maybe, but I don't see any difference in this regard from the leadership of the Dems, by and large.

not quite. During Bush's first term, Dems gave him alot of support and 'rope'. But now, the GOP can't return the favor. Right out of the gate, it's been 100% opposition.

Mel...
 

POPASMOKE

Keep your turns up
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
648
Reaction score
135
Location
25 klicks SE of Elephant Valley
The Republicans used to be a centrist party, and the Democrats somewhat leftist. Now, it's the Dems who are basically centrist, and the Republicans who have swung toward the edge.

ROFL :D

One of the most telling things, i think, during the town hall protests, was the anger. And it wasn't really anger about health care. Health care was just a flashpoint. People are doing things that have nothing to do with health care -- carrying guns and signs depicting Obama as Hitler, for example. One woman, to loud applause, was taped screaming with obvious frustration: "I want my country back!" She sees the world changing and it scares her. She does not like it, not one bit.

Alot of Americans crossed party lines to vote for Obama based on his rhetoric, being able to articulate, and their naive belief in his oft stated goal of bringing everyone together. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!

What they got was the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, et al foisting a truly radical left agenda on the country, socialized Obamacare, the emasculation (which continues) of U.S. intelligence gathering, and pissing on what's left of us boomers in terms of the 9 trillion dollar budget we'll bequeath to our children, grandchildren and their children. Yea, they're scared. It's not what they thought they were getting.

I just finished an 11 hour drive yesterday, and I listened to two hours of Rush Limbaugh...

I knew you were one of us!! :Hug2:
 

Andrew

Most of the rules gotta go...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
792
Reaction score
64
Location
Alabama
The Parties suck. If you can observe the dems as much as the repubs, you would have to see their spokespersons say some very lame and inflammatory things too.
I would scrap both if I could because both are awful. Libertarians and Constitutionalists on the other hand hold some promise.
 

darkprincealain

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
3,395
Reaction score
1,978
Location
Nowhere. Now here.
Until they have pundits. Libertarian and Constitutionalist pundits would be just as bad. It's what's necessary now to grab ratings and sell books, in the lowest-common-denominator American media.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
Let me just start by saying that I'm not doing this to group people under the same hat, insult anyone, host an argument, or invite hyperbole. I'm just a foreigner who occasionally catches a glimpse of the American media, and is left puzzled by something:

Can someone explain to me what the deal is with the Republican Party these days?
I don't exactly go out of my way to witness these kinds of thing, but everything I see from the right-wing media and commentators is laden with this smarmy nastiness that is frankly embarrassing to see come from adults.

Equating criticism of president Bush with treason, over-the-top nationalism, hypocrisy, fear-and-hate mongering, vague racism, and a determined effort to stand against the left-wing and do everything to make them look bad, rather than . . . you know . . . focus on fixing their own internal problems and maybe actually working with the Dems to run the country effectively.

And it's all so blatant! So filled with obvious bias and arrogance and rabble-rousing. From my (admittedly limited) viewpoint, it seems like the Republicans have adopted a policy of appealing to the very meanest, dumbest and angriest of their countrymen. Which I just don't get.

Any thoughts?

As a regular viewer of the O'Reilly factor, let me say this:

Estoy de acuerdo.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
The Parties suck. If you can observe the dems as much as the repubs, you would have to see their spokespersons say some very lame and inflammatory things too.
I would scrap both if I could because both are awful. Libertarians and Constitutionalists on the other hand hold some promise.

Its hard to take you seriously on this topic, regardless of what you say, considering your current signature.

Which, for the record, says:

One
Big
Ass
Mistake
America

That's the same mean-spirited crap the OP is talking about, isn't it?
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
Bart, some people simply take that signature as a statement of fact. :D



Just sayin'...
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
not quite. During Bush's first term, Dems gave him alot of support and 'rope'. But now, the GOP can't return the favor. Right out of the gate, it's been 100% opposition.

Mel...
I see this as exactly the opposite: the current admin has made zero effort to "reach across the aisle." And the leadership in Congress has made even less effort...

Regardless, RIGHT NOW I don't see any difference. Look at the "debate" on the stimulus package...

I'm not sure how forcing things through, sans debate and sans consideration of different ideas, demonstrates ANY intent to work together.
 

DavidZahir

Malkavian Primogen
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
2,095
Reaction score
268
Location
Los Angeles
Website
undeadwhispers.yuku.com
Robeiae--I'm curious what you call the retaining of Republicans in top positions (like Defense Secretary) and selection of other Republicans to high positions as well as the ongoing negotiations with the Republican leadership is if not at least some effort at bipartisanship?

Frankly, I don't think your statement matches the facts at all. I get that you yourself don't like all the decisions made, and you feel maybe the Democrats should have given up more, but to claim zero effort has been made is simply not true.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,698
Reaction score
1,539
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
Until they have pundits. Libertarian and Constitutionalist pundits would be just as bad. It's what's necessary now to grab ratings and sell books, in the lowest-common-denominator American media.
True, although media hyperbole is pretty old stuff.
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,833
Location
Limbo
I see this as exactly the opposite: the current admin has made zero effort to "reach across the aisle." And the leadership in Congress has made even less effort...

Regardless, RIGHT NOW I don't see any difference. Look at the "debate" on the stimulus package...

I'm not sure how forcing things through, sans debate and sans consideration of different ideas, demonstrates ANY intent to work together.

Perception perception. See I see just the opposite. Obama tried reaching over the aisle, even meeting GOP members on their own turf and they basically said, 'No'.

If Obama ran for office on a certain platform and then got elected, shouldn't he push through with the platform he ran on? Yes. Yet, GOP members seemed shocked that he is doing so.

To use an analogy. If the voters voted for a Vegetarian Chef, should the Carnivores be shocked that there is no steak on the menu?

When the Vegetarian chef goes to the Carnivores to solicit their opinion on future dinner selections, instead of the Carnivores looking at options they can live with, they insist that he put steak on the menu.

That is pretty much how alot of this comes across to me.

What I would have prefered is the GOP doing the best within Obama's plans, basically, give Obama all the rope he needs to hang himself if he is wrong (which IMHO is what the Dems gave Bush).

But the GOP from my perspective is not doing that. Not even close. It's been Obama the socialist from Day 1. Not even a year into his presidency and the GOP has political ads running against him and his policies. Did the dems do this with Bush? No.

Mel...
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
Robeiae--I'm curious what you call the retaining of Republicans in top positions (like Defense Secretary) and selection of other Republicans to high positions as well as the ongoing negotiations with the Republican leadership is if not at least some effort at bipartisanship?

Frankly, I don't think your statement matches the facts at all. I get that you yourself don't like all the decisions made, and you feel maybe the Democrats should have given up more, but to claim zero effort has been made is simply not true.
Really? So Obama has--like Bush--allowed a top dog type of leader from the Republican Party to actually craft legislation?

I'm not sure that people really get this, at all. I'll say it again: Ted Kennedy WROTE the legislation for No Child Left Behind (well, most of it). He wrote it in EXACTLY the way he wanted to write it. Then, he helped push it through. And then, when it was signed into law, Kennedy acted like it was a major coup to achieve this under a Repub. The implication was that he--Kennedy--was getting something out of the Bush admin, out of a Republican admin, that they didn't want to give. What a hero...

Since Obama has taken office, he's basically allowed Pelosi and Reid to ramrod his legislation packages through. Congressional leadership has tried to prevent debate--and succeeded in many cases--and has brought "bipartisan" efforts to a new low. Granted, the Repubs before them started down that road.

But Obama hasn't tried to change this at all. And he has openly mocked/criticized those that disagree with him to the extent that one would have to be fool to think he was open to any bipartisan efforts on major issues.

He already is--imo--the most divisive President I have seen in my lifetime. And that's a shame, imo. I voted for him and I still think McCain sucks. But no way could he have sucked this bad.
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
Perception perception. See I see just the opposite. Obama tried reaching over the aisle, even meeting GOP members on their own turf and they basically said, 'No'.

If Obama ran for office on a certain platform and then got elected, shouldn't he push through with the platform he ran on? Yes. Yet, GOP members seemed shocked that he is doing so.
By not actually allowing legislation to be read before it gets voted on? That's the right way to "push"?

To use an analogy.
Please don't.
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,833
Location
Limbo
What about the Republicans he tried to recruit into his Cabinet but then changed their minds in the eleventh hour?

Mel..