The GOP Is Falling Apart

[jillian]

and that sir, is the people's fault.

Perhaps. But there are reasons for it. When polled, people seem to say "dump the whole lot". But when asked about their specific representatives, people usually poll positive. The reason for that is constituent services. These guys, if they do their job properly, are a part of their communities. They make the rounds to schools, places of worship, etc. Their offices are open to their constituents when there's a problem. They're familiar faces. So the local folk aren't inclined, necessarily, to replace them with the unknown.

And *that's* why Tip O'Neil said "all politics is local".

 

[Annie]

Perhaps. But there are reasons for it. When polled, people seem to say "dump the whole lot". But when asked about their specific representatives, people usually poll positive. The reason for that is constituent services. These guys, if they do their job properly, are a part of their communities. They make the rounds to schools, places of worship, etc. Their offices are open to their constituents when there's a problem. They're familiar faces. So the local folk aren't inclined, necessarily, to replace them with the unknown.

And *that's* why Tip O'Neil said "all politics is local".

All that is true, no disagreement here. At the same time, those that are actively engaged, even to the point of just voting, have declined. When the electorate is made up of only those more actively engaged in the process and those that only go vote for their party or on promises they hear, the whole system is heading for a fall-this one has been a long time coming.

You would be shocked how many people do not read a newspaper, watch anything that has to do with news.

 

[jillian]

All that is true, no disagreement here. At the same time, those that are actively engaged, even to the point of just voting, have declined. When the electorate is made up of only those more actively engaged in the process and those that only go vote for their party or on promises they hear, the whole system is heading for a fall-this one has been a long time coming.

I know this is going to sound funny, but I think part of what it needed to combat that are civics classes in schools. Kids growning up are totally disengaged (unless they have parents who are political) and don't have a clue about the system or what rights they are entitled to.

You would be shocked how many people do not read a newspaper, watch anything that has to do with news.

Not in the least shocked. I saw what we ended up with for pres the past two times out.

 

[Annie]

I know this is going to sound funny, but I think part of what it needed to combat that are civics classes in schools. Kids growning up are totally disengaged (unless they have parents who are political) and don't have a clue about the system or what rights they are entitled to.

I agree. However when you look at 'standards' civics requirements are far fewer than diversity and world community. One might be tempted to say, those are good issues, problem is that without a real understanding of our system, people risk losing the very levers that can bring about change.



Not in the least shocked. I saw what we ended up with for pres the past two times out. [/QUOTE] That might seem clever, but the same process that brings those you find so wanting, also produces those on your side that are every clamoring for less free speech, though they don't recognize such. Idiots are found on both sides, in increasing numbers.

 

[William Joyce]

and that sir, is the people's fault.

I don't know... yes and no. What choice do the people have? Between tweedle dum and tweedle dee. Between the billionaire liberal mayor and the billionarie liberal software developer. I guess it's the people's fault to the extent "people" are generally pretty uninformed and go with style over substance.

But how does the media help with this? They fawn over style and never talk about issues - or if they do, it's only to the extent of, "and this is how he's positioning himself."

The system also doesn't help. In Big America, you need to be an expert at raising money, not leadership or policy. Being good at one may not necessarily indicate skill with the latter.

And you get nowhere without kowtowing to special interests. Think we should curb Social Security? The AARP will destroy you. Think foreign policy should be different? AIPAC will destroy you. Etc.

Today's NYT on Bush v. The Base:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/washington/03immig.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin

 

[Truthmatters]

you want to talk about uninformed?

You sir still think people of color have some inherent quailities which gene couple with skin color.

Maybe you should start educating yourself before you worry about educating others?

 

[Bern80]

listen to who...YOU?

100 million or so average everyday Americans?

come on Kathianne, wake up. If you don't sit on the board of a multi-national corporation, or carry a card of a national lobbying group like AIPAC for example, you have no voice to Congress.

I think that has been made abundantly clear since the Dem's took power in Jan. More than 70% of the people in this country want us to leave Iraq, and that's why Americans voted DEM in November, but congress gives Bush more money.

A definite majority of Americans want Bush and Cheney impeached, but impeachment remains "off the table".

Things will never get any better in this country if the people continue to argue left/right, dem/repub, lib/con.

That's exactly how they want it.

this hits the nail on the head as close as anything as to what the problem is with our govt. I have little doubt that most politicians have decent intentions when running for office initially. When elected however they find that is corporations and special interest groups that have sway over their political career. More sway than the inidividuals that voted for them at least. So what are you going to do? your going to do things for the people that have the greatest sway over your career.

 

[Bullypulpit]

All that is true, no disagreement here. At the same time, those that are actively engaged, even to the point of just voting, have declined. When the electorate is made up of only those more actively engaged in the process and those that only go vote for their party or on promises they hear, the whole system is heading for a fall-this one has been a long time coming.

You would be shocked how many people do not read a newspaper, watch anything that has to do with news.

And that's why you get the extreme polarization we have today. The politically active are involved and that involvement, since the relative numbers are smaller, tend to reflect the views of the extremists of a given political persuasion to a greater extent.

The dreaded "mainstream media" also shares a portion of the blame in failing to present the issues in any serious way, in failing to provide more than thirty seconds at a time to political candidates, in failing to provide any more discussions on the issue consisting of more than sound-bites. The Fourth Estate has been reduced, with the rest of the media, to pandering to the lowest common denominator.

 

[Gunny]

you want to talk about uninformed?

You sir still think people of color have some inherent quailities which gene couple with skin color.

Maybe you should start educating yourself before you worry about educating others?

And you probably ought to work on forming simple, coherent sentences. The second one makes absolutely NO sense.

Your first sentence would be incorrect. WJ is not uninformed. That he chooses to hold an ideology that you don't/disagree with, in no way makes him uniformed.

 

[Truthmatters]

do you know what gene coupling is?

 

[Gunny]

do you know what gene coupling is?

Which would have WHAT exactly to do with your incoherent statement?

Are you saying you do not believe that race has inherent qualities which predispose a given race to act/react in a certain, predictable manner?

 

[Paulie]

I hope the Dems try to impeach - please do it

The approval numbers for the Dem Congress would frop into single digits

I hate a dem congress just as much as i hate a repub congress.

Do you not even at all feel as though there is a reason why the Pres. and VP should be investigated for possible crimes? You must be in fantasy land if you don't. I know it's been said a hundred billion times already, but Clinton was investigated for a blow-job, and Bush and Cheney are usurping the constitution, and are given a free pass to do so without consequence.

Something doesn't seem wrong about that to you?

It's not about approval numbers and political one-upsmanship...It's about making good on an OATH that these people took to defend and protect the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. They don't take an oath to defend and protect the President and Vice President.

Too many people now a days are being programmed to brush aside the constitution for national security's sake. That's fundamentally wrong. The constitution is the sole reason why you have this country to live in and argue this shit to begin with. If we allow the executive branch of government (regardless of who is the commander, Bush, Obama, Paul, WHOEVER) to obtain the type of power it seems to be seeking, than we are no longer the free nation that has been the envy of so many around the world.

If you think for one second that congresspeople are voting on bills based on how they think the bills will positively affect the American people, you are lost. As long as the American people do nothing more than ***** about problems, and avoid getting active, Congress will serve the interests of the corporations and lobbying groups FIRST. The people aren't the ones keeping their campaigns financed, and raising their national exposure rate (with very FEW exceptions). Someone in this thread mentioned American Idol...that is exactly what i mean. We as americans are more interested in our daily TV programming than we are about what is really happening in this country. We watch corporate news deliver us the day's events in a psychologically influential way, and we do no more than go to work the next day and ***** at the water cooler, before we change the subject to the previous night's episode of Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader.

Red States Rule, how active are you in public about your political feelings? Do you lobby congress? Do you get out and help support a candidate's campaign that you truely believe in?

Basically, do you do more than *****?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

There's 300 million of us. The government makes up only a tiny percentage of that. If we could ever actually UNITE in this country as a people with one voice, maybe real changes could be made.

 

[Gunny]

I hate a dem congress just as much as i hate a repub congress.

Do you not even at all feel as though there is a reason why the Pres. and VP should be investigated for possible crimes? You must be in fantasy land if you don't. I know it's been said a hundred billion times already, but Clinton was investigated for a blow-job, and Bush and Cheney are usurping the constitution, and are given a free pass to do so without consequence.

Something doesn't seem wrong about that to you?

It's not about approval numbers and political one-upsmanship...It's about making good on an OATH that these people took to defend and protect the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. They don't take an oath to defend and protect the President and Vice President.

Too many people now a days are being programmed to brush aside the constitution for national security's sake. That's fundamentally wrong. The constitution is the sole reason why you have this country to live in and argue this shit to begin with. If we allow the executive branch of government (regardless of who is the commander, Bush, Obama, Paul, WHOEVER) to obtain the type of power it seems to be seeking, than we are no longer the free nation that has been the envy of so many around the world.

If you think for one second that congresspeople are voting on bills based on how they think the bills will positively affect the American people, you are lost. As long as the American people do nothing more than ***** about problems, and avoid getting active, Congress will serve the interests of the corporations and lobbying groups FIRST. The people aren't the ones keeping their campaigns financed, and raising their national exposure rate (with very FEW exceptions). Someone in this thread mentioned American Idol...that is exactly what i mean. We as americans are more interested in our daily TV programming than we are about what is really happening in this country. We watch corporate news deliver us the day's events in a psychologically influential way, and we do no more than go to work the next day and ***** at the water cooler, before we change the subject to the previous night's episode of Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader.

Red States Rule, how active are you in public about your political feelings? Do you lobby congress? Do you get out and help support a candidate's campaign that you truely believe in?

Basically, do you do more than *****?



There's 300 million of us. The government makes up only a tiny percentage of that. If we could ever actually UNITE in this country as a people with one voice, maybe real changes could be made.

First, I don't think ANY President that I can recall in my lifetime has been put under the public microscope and been victim to a relentless negative media/left-wingnut barrage as Bush.

And I DO think that any feeling that each and every thing he does warrants some kind of investigation stems directly from THAT.

I do agree however that our elected representatives represent themselves, their own interests and partisan politics first, and any representation of "We, the People" that mat result from it is purely coincidental.

 

[maineman]

First, I don't think ANY President that I can recall in my lifetime has been put under the public microscope and been victim to a relentless negative media/left-wingnut barrage as Bush.

jennifer flowers whitewater filegate fostergate travelgate paula jones kenneth starr special prosecutor monica lewinsky blue dress house judiciary committee henry hyde impeachment impeachment trial???? did you somehow not recall that?

 

[Paulie]

First, I don't think ANY President that I can recall in my lifetime has been put under the public microscope and been victim to a relentless negative media/left-wingnut barrage as Bush.

No, huh? For a while there, I felt like i knew Monica Lewinsky personally. Anyway though, I'm 27, so I don't have much experience with how presidents before, say, Bush 1 were treated by the media on a daily basis. But look at it from a media company's point of view...If you want to compete for market share, you are going to cover the stories that are interesting. It's sad how Anna Nicole Smith was considered more interesting than ANYTHING else for about a period of a month straight, but that's what you get these days.

People DO want to hear about politics (they may not want to do anything ABOUT it, but they want to hear about it), so you have to give them stories about politics as well. I think that possible crimes by the sitting Pres. and VP are newsworthy...don't you? How many possible crimes does the media have to cover before you start questioning this administration?

And I DO think that any feeling that each and every thing he does warrants some kind of investigation stems directly from THAT.

I agree, to some extent. But how can you blame people for thinking that? Either you just have total 100% blind faith in the administration, or you are burying your head in the sand, if you don't question what exactly is going on in it.

I do however think that you can't just stop at the story the corporate media covers...You have to dig deeper, and just make a decision based on how it all looks to you. Right now, I see the President, and particularly the Vice President, and a lot of their corporate cronies, profitting unbelievably from the Iraq war. You'll never get those stories in the news, though. You might hear about Haliburton briefly, but that's about it.

Do some searches on The Carlyle Group, to start with, if you're not familiar with them already.

I just hate seeing people just blindly accept everything the mainstream media reports, as long as it fits within, and benefits their own political ideology.

 

[Gunny]

jennifer flowers whitewater filegate fostergate travelgate paula jones kenneth starr special prosecutor monica lewinsky blue dress house judiciary committee henry hyde impeachment impeachment trial???? did you somehow not recall that?

Which is a tip of the iceberg compared to the way Bush has been treated. I will also point out that while I was and am no great fan of Bill Clinton's, I thought much of that shit was a partisan sideshow every bit as much as I think it is now, and it seems like each time the presidency changes parties recently, the other side has to up the ante.

It is not productive, and it distracts from actually governing this Nation, and it matters little to me WHICH side is doing it. I don't see one party as being any more guilty than the other.

 

[Gunny]

No, huh? For a while there, I felt like i knew Monica Lewinsky personally. Anyway though, I'm 27, so I don't have much experience with how presidents before, say, Bush 1 were treated by the media on a daily basis. But look at it from a media company's point of view...If you want to compete for market share, you are going to cover the stories that are interesting. It's sad how Anna Nicole Smith was considered more interesting than ANYTHING else for about a period of a month straight, but that's what you get these days.

People DO want to hear about politics (they may not want to do anything ABOUT it, but they want to hear about it), so you have to give them stories about politics as well. I think that possible crimes by the sitting Pres. and VP are newsworthy...don't you? How many possible crimes does the media have to cover before you start questioning this administration?

I have no problem with responsible journalism. Spent four years in HS working on school papers as a matter of fact, and walked dead-ass away from it because there is NOTHING responsible about it. And that was in 1978. It hasn't gotten better.

People don't care about politics anymore than they care about anything else. What they REALLY want is DIRT, and the MSM is right there to provide it to them.

How many accusations of possible crimes does the media have to cover before you start questioning the media?


I agree, to some extent. But how can you blame people for thinking that? Either you just have total 100% blind faith in the administration, or you are burying your head in the sand, if you don't question what exactly is going on in it.

I didn't say a word about not questioning the administration. Questioning the administration and witch hunting are two very different animals.

I do however think that you can't just stop at the story the corporate media covers...You have to dig deeper, and just make a decision based on how it all looks to you. Right now, I see the President, and particularly the Vice President, and a lot of their corporate cronies, profitting unbelievably from the Iraq war. You'll never get those stories in the news, though. You might hear about Haliburton briefly, but that's about it.

Do some searches on The Carlyle Group, to start with, if you're not familiar with them already.

I just hate seeing people just blindly accept everything the mainstream media reports, as long as it fits within, and benefits their own political ideology.

And I just hate being stereotyped as some uneducated, blind partisan by someone who hasn't been around long enough to know I am anything but one.

Disagreeing does not automatically mean I'm buying anything from anyone, and again, as someone who spent as much time in journalism as I did, I would be the LAST person to blindly accept what the MSM has to offer.

 

[Annie]

Which is a tip of the iceberg compared to the way Bush has been treated. I will also point out that while I was and am no great fan of Bill Clinton's, I thought much of that shit was a partisan sideshow every bit as much as I think it is now, and it seems like each time the presidency changes parties recently, the other side has to up the ante.

It is not productive, and it distracts from actually governing this Nation, and it matters little to me WHICH side is doing it. I don't see one party as being any more guilty than the other.

I agree with your take now and then. Seriously, those that claim you have to be 100% with the administration or skeptical of all, are just wrong.

I disagree strenuously with the immigration nonsense.

I am questioning the good faith change in Iraq strategy; with the 'surge' then the leaks of pullbacks; without the full complement of troops deployed before the leak, much less time for them to get up and running.

I am very concerned about the presidential order regarding 'national emergencies'-I would be even moreso if both president and congress were the same. Considering this action, I'm even more concerned about the possibilities of abuse of the Patriot Act, something I did think necessary, not so sure anymore.

 

[Truthmatters]

Which is a tip of the iceberg compared to the way Bush has been treated. I will also point out that while I was and am no great fan of Bill Clinton's, I thought much of that shit was a partisan sideshow every bit as much as I think it is now, and it seems like each time the presidency changes parties recently, the other side has to up the ante.

It is not productive, and it distracts from actually governing this Nation, and it matters little to me WHICH side is doing it. I don't see one party as being any more guilty than the other.

Since the begining of Bush's first term there has been almost no oversight from the congress.

 

[William Joyce]

do you know what gene coupling is?

Yes, and I oppose gay marriage, too.