Anger in Politics

[Mac1958]

.

The Division Pimps -- those media pundits on both ends of the spectrum who have a vested professional and financial interest in keeping the two "sides" angry at each other -- have done a fabulous job. Until we stop allowing ourselves to be influenced by them and start acting like honest, civil adults, the divisions will only keep growing.

.

Another sound observation...the electorate gets iincreasingly more polarized and dysfunctional as those fame and fortune seeking media "stars" sensationalize events and obsess about "who's to blame" rather than encouraging cooperation and solution seeking...And the recent decision by the Supremes is likely to exacerbate and amplify all that negativity by opening even more opportunities for self serving moneyed interests....

Agreed. It will only increase both the noise that is making things worse and the influence that the moneyed interests have over the process.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Some people want Citizens United and McCutcheon to stand and others don't. Given the thoughtful comments in this thread, is it safe to assume that those who want them to stand contribute to the problem to a greater degree than those who don't?

 

[Avatar4321]

Some people want Citizens United and McCutcheon to stand and others don't. Given the thoughtful comments in this thread, is it safe to assume that those who want them to stand contribute to the problem to a greater degree than those who don't?

How is allowing people to criticize politicians and donate to politicians and causes they agree with contribute to the problem? I've always seen Free speech as a net positive and something we should strive for even if it did create a negative.

Why do you think people should be prohibited from criticizing incumbants prior to an election?

 

[Anccar]

Ban elections.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Ban elections.

That's an option. It's not a good one but it's an option.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The entire platform is return to the Good Old Days, the Golden Age. It's nothing but emotion because it ignores all the reasons why we grew the government as large as we did. We didn't invent Social Security because life was so great in the past. We invented it because it sucked but you guys think you'd love the days of suck? Well the Americans who lived then sure didn't. That's how what we have now came about.

When the rivers start to burn again, we'll be back to your Good Old Days, god forbid.

Why is it that the dems are always yearning to turn back to the glorious years of poverty, high unemployment, depression under fdr?

What created that is what you want to return to. These programs came about because we had serious problems. You want to go back and try again what caused the serious problems in the first place.

No no. Dems have glorified the fdr years and have pined for the factories, public works, govt love, and so on.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Is refusing to listen to the ideas and opinions of others an example of acting like an honest, civil adult?

I'm not sure.

Let's ask Brendan Eich.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Some people want Citizens United and McCutcheon to stand and others don't. Given the thoughtful comments in this thread, is it safe to assume that those who want them to stand contribute to the problem to a greater degree than those who don't?

How is allowing people to criticize politicians and donate to politicians and causes they agree with contribute to the problem? I've always seen Free speech as a net positive and something we should strive for even if it did create a negative.

Why do you think people should be prohibited from criticizing incumbants prior to an election?

First....I am NOT the one in this thread saying that the Supreme Court is adding to the problem.

Second....you are putting words into my mouth. What a lame post.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Is refusing to listen to the ideas and opinions of others an example of acting like an honest, civil adult?

I'm not sure.

Let's ask Brendan Eich.

Never heard of him.

Looked him up.

Turns out he is a dummy who resigned from a job after doing some stupid things.

I would say that is the result of people listening to his ideas and opinions, wouldn't you?

You really nailed it!

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Is refusing to listen to the ideas and opinions of others an example of acting like an honest, civil adult?

I'm not sure.

Let's ask Brendan Eich.

Never heard of him.

Looked him up.

Turns out he is a dummy who resigned from a job after doing some stupid things.

I would say that is the result of people listening to his ideas and opinions, wouldn't you?

You really nailed it!

Ah, so expressing your opinion, by giving money to a cause that you believe in, is now a "stupid thing".

It is a good thing that you are such such and honest and civil adult.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I'm not sure.

Let's ask Brendan Eich.

Never heard of him.

Looked him up.

Turns out he is a dummy who resigned from a job after doing some stupid things.

I would say that is the result of people listening to his ideas and opinions, wouldn't you?

You really nailed it!

Ah, so expressing your opinion, by giving money to a cause that you believe in, is now a "stupid thing".

It is a good thing that you are such such and honest and civil adult.

Thinking that money is speech is stupid.
Doing things that go against the wishes of your employer is stupid.
Expressing your opinion.....is not stupid unless your opinion is stupid.

Mr. Eich resigned. His bigotry was not acceptable to those who sign his checks.

Stupid.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Some people want Citizens United and McCutcheon to stand and others don't. Given the thoughtful comments in this thread, is it safe to assume that those who want them to stand contribute to the problem to a greater degree than those who don't?

Yes, I can agree with this statement.

 

[dr.d]

Some people want Citizens United and McCutcheon to stand and others don't. Given the thoughtful comments in this thread, is it safe to assume that those who want them to stand contribute to the problem to a greater degree than those who don't?

How is allowing people to criticize politicians and donate to politicians and causes they agree with contribute to the problem? I've always seen Free speech as a net positive and something we should strive for even if it did create a negative.

Why do you think people should be prohibited from criticizing incumbants prior to an election?

I agree that free speech is a "net positive"...at the same time, positive outcomes only come from truth in speech...and freedom to be heard when one speaks...Egregious Lies in political speech which are isolely intended to stir anger and mislead the populace contribute nothing to freedom of expression and prevent collaborative problem solving.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com