What do liberals want the US to be?

[SAYIT]

I see you've locked up with Sir Spamelot. I've got him on ignore just to avoid wading through the pages of crap.
I'll bypass his posts and say that you represent a rarity on the board. You are someone who calls it as you see it without regard to ideology.

I appreciate that.

Evidently you've been Listening. Thank you. I do indeed find the political ideologues here - both left and right - to be every bit the threat to my America as al-Qaeda ideologues.

 

[Steinlight]

To clarify, liberals are materialist in that they advance the agenda of transnational capital(the economic "elite"). They are nihilistic in regards to their promotion of moral and cultural relativism under their banner of promoting "equality".

The GOP are more or less big business liberals. They have no moral principles and are not patriotic in any sense, but are more blatant in their support of our current kleptocracy.

Your confusing liberal with Democratic party!

No I am not.

Liberalism is a destructive utopian ideology that fails to recognize the social aspect of mankind, reducing man to a purely material being(economics uber alles) and supporting a blind drive towards "liberty" and "equality" regardless of the consequences.

LOL riiiight the liberal jobs killing regulations are not pushing jobs off-shore. I suppose even those Democrats in congress who are fighting these regulations because its costing their districts jobs are in on your big conspiracy?

8 years of Dubya/GOP 'job creator' policies and they lot 1+ million jobs inn 8 years (NOT including the 4+ million lost in 2009)



Obama has NET 7+ million PRIVATE sector jobs since 2009

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data



Good snip, ONCE AGAIN:



Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs

No hard evidence is offered for this claim; it is simply asserted as self-evident and repeated endlessly throughout the conservative echo chamber.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/

Posting a blogger's thoughts in large font does not add any cred to them. Bartlett is a disgruntled Repub who just this October tried to make the case that Obama is a Republican. Yeah ... OK.

To clarify, liberals are materialist in that they advance the agenda of transnational capital(the economic "elite"). They are nihilistic in regards to their promotion of moral and cultural relativism under their banner of promoting "equality".

The GOP are more or less big business liberals. They have no moral principles and are not patriotic in any sense, but are more blatant in their support of our current kleptocracy.

Your confusing liberal with Democratic party!

No I am not.

Liberalism is a destructive utopian ideology that fails to recognize the social aspect of mankind, reducing man to a purely material being(economics uber alles) and supporting a blind drive towards "liberty" and "equality" regardless of the consequences.

It also has an arrogance associated with it that assumes the elite know what's best for everyone. Like all 310,000,000 people in the U.S. are cut from the same cloth.

LOL! But that's just the same old crap the Left has been pushing from the Progressive days of the Eugenicists.

The Left is a lie... from soup to Liberals. There's not an iota of truth represented in so much as a single facet of Left-think.

To be fair, the right has it's fair share of disingenuous losers who hide behind ideology to achieve their goals.

I believe in the fundamentals of conservatism as I define it (not the morons like dudpeepee or rightwanker).

Within the scope of limited government is the human experience. When people are doing what they "should" as dictated by their conciences.....things go pretty well.

Not just a limited central government, but a decentralized government. There needs to be a devolution of powers to avoid the increasing political, economic and social costs of an artificially large state(see economies of scale, the same principle applies with governments). Simply put, America has far too many people to effectively and properly govern through a growing Federal Government. As our population grows, we will have to decentralize power from the federal bureaucracy to avoid the problems that the USSR faced and the EU is currently facing.

 

[Redfish]

Your confusing liberal with Democratic party!

No I am not.

Liberalism is a destructive utopian ideology that fails to recognize the social aspect of mankind, reducing man to a purely material being(economics uber alles) and supporting a blind drive towards "liberty" and "equality" regardless of the consequences.

8 years of Dubya/GOP 'job creator' policies and they lot 1+ million jobs inn 8 years (NOT including the 4+ million lost in 2009)



Obama has NET 7+ million PRIVATE sector jobs since 2009

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data



Good snip, ONCE AGAIN:



Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs

No hard evidence is offered for this claim; it is simply asserted as self-evident and repeated endlessly throughout the conservative echo chamber.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/regulation-and-unemployment/

Posting a blogger's thoughts in large font does not add any cred to them. Bartlett is a disgruntled Repub who just this October tried to make the case that Obama is a Republican. Yeah ... OK.

Your confusing liberal with Democratic party!

No I am not.

Liberalism is a destructive utopian ideology that fails to recognize the social aspect of mankind, reducing man to a purely material being(economics uber alles) and supporting a blind drive towards "liberty" and "equality" regardless of the consequences.

It also has an arrogance associated with it that assumes the elite know what's best for everyone. Like all 310,000,000 people in the U.S. are cut from the same cloth.

LOL! But that's just the same old crap the Left has been pushing from the Progressive days of the Eugenicists.

The Left is a lie... from soup to Liberals. There's not an iota of truth represented in so much as a single facet of Left-think.

To be fair, the right has it's fair share of disingenuous losers who hide behind ideology to achieve their goals.

I believe in the fundamentals of conservatism as I define it (not the morons like dudpeepee or rightwanker).

Within the scope of limited government is the human experience. When people are doing what they "should" as dictated by their conciences.....things go pretty well.

Not just a limited central government, but a decentralized government. There need to be a devolution of powers to avoid the increasing political, economic and social costs of an artificially large state(see economies of scale, the same principle applies with governments). Simply put, America has far to many people to effectively and properly govern through a growing Federal Government. As our population grows, we will have to decentralize power from the federal bureaucracy to avoid the problems that the USSR faced and the EU is currently facing.

agree, and not one of the liberal posters has grasped that very basic concept. Apparently they want their lives controlled by a small group of super elites like Gruber. Apparently they agree with him that they are too stupid to make their own decisions.

Liberalism is indeed a mental disease.

but I digress, if any of our resident liberals would care to address the question in the OP with a logical, rational post, please do so.

What exactly and specifically do you want changed about the USA. Concepts like "more caring" "equality" "fairness" etc are not acceptable. give us specifics related to taxes, regulations, social issues, government, and individual rights and responsibilities.

If thats too hard, then tell us specifically what you find wrong with the current USA. Again, emotional concepts are not acceptable answers.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

To be fair, the right has it's fair share of disingenuous losers who hide behind ideology to achieve their goals.

I believe in the fundamentals of conservatism as I define it (not the morons like dudpeepee or rightwanker).

Within the scope of limited government is the human experience. When people are doing what they "should" as dictated by their conciences.....things go pretty well.

The problem is that you state that those individuals are RWs and they're nothing remotely akin to such.

Americans, those who recognize, respect, defend and adhere to the principles in nature that define America and, while never perfect human beings, are objective in their reasoning thus do not claim that their shortcomings are 'natural' thus, should not be discouraged by arcane cultural mores and should be promoted as preferred above principled, sustainable behavior typified by those mores and stationed within the standards that also recognize those natural laws.

This issue is not 'he said she said', one person's opinion is equal to the next... this issue is about soundly reasoned ideas, which come about from the observation of those natural laws, and the rejection of those laws by a perversion of human reasoning, which is animated by a force in nature which is threatened by those laws and the expression of those laws.

It's truly not even a debatable point, as the evidence of such is obvious to me and should be obvious to every American. And things only 'go well' where the consciousnesses of those of sound reason are practiced. When the consciousnesses of the Left are practiced, we find men marrying men, the Senate claiming that keeping mass-murderers awake is TORTURE, that those who ran on reducing the deficit, DOUBLE THE DEBT IN 6 YEARS, the IRS runs to prosecute innocent people who's crime is that they were trying to form a political opposition to the people executing the IRS and that Riots resulted ALL OVER THE MISSLE EAST from an online video, prolonged stagnation, legalized drugs, etc., etc.

 

[Listening]

I see you've locked up with Sir Spamelot. I've got him on ignore just to avoid wading through the pages of crap.
I'll bypass his posts and say that you represent a rarity on the board. You are someone who calls it as you see it without regard to ideology.

I appreciate that.

Evidently you've been Listening. Thank you. I do indeed find the political ideologues here - both left and right - to be every bit the threat to my America as al-Qaeda ideologues.

Don't get me wrong.

I believe in "conservative" values.

The problem is that those values don't see solutions in terms of the government. They see government as George Washington stated

To be fair, the right has it's fair share of disingenuous losers who hide behind ideology to achieve their goals.

I believe in the fundamentals of conservatism as I define it (not the morons like dudpeepee or rightwanker).

Within the scope of limited government is the human experience. When people are doing what they "should" as dictated by their conciences.....things go pretty well.

The problem is that you state that those individuals are RWs and they're nothing remotely akin to such.

Americans, those who recognize, respect, defend and adhere to the principles in nature that define America and, while never perfect human beings, are objective in their reasoning thus do not claim that their shortcomings are 'natural' thus, should not be discouraged by arcane cultural mores and should be promoted as preferred above principled, sustainable behavior typified by those mores and stationed within the standards that also recognize those natural laws.

This issue is not 'he said she said', one person's opinion is equal to the next... this issue is about soundly reasoned ideas, which come about from the observation of those natural laws, and the rejection of those laws by a perversion of human reasoning, which is animated by a force in nature which is threatened by those laws and the expression of those laws.

It's truly not even a debatable point, as the evidence of such is obvious to me and should be obvious to every American. And things only 'go well' where the consciousnesses of those of sound reason are practiced. When the consciousnesses of the Left are practiced, we find men marrying men, the Senate claiming that keeping mass-murderers awake is TORTURE, that those who ran on reducing the deficit, DOUBLE THE DEBT IN 6 YEARS, the IRS runs to prosecute innocent people who's crime is that they were trying to form a political opposition to the people executing the IRS and that Riots resulted ALL OVER THE MISSLE EAST from an online video, prolonged stagnation, legalized drugs, etc., etc.

Actually, I know those asshats are not conservatives.

But, one of their liberal tactics is to define conservatism in terms they wish were the case so they can then argue against it.

Have you ever read Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict Of Visions" ?

 

[Londoner]

Left-think rests entirely upon Relativism.

Relativism is the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's cultural, societal, historical and personal context, and, as such can never be the result of soundly reasoned moral absolutes.


It is through this deviation in reason that relativism axiomatically rejects the objectivity which is essential to truth.

What is a soundly reasoned moral absolute? Kant’s categorical imperative?

Why do value or moral judgements even need to be proved with the certainty of a mathematical theorem? Society hardly needs this kind of nuclear-grade certainty to uphold laws against violence and torture.

We believe in God without certainty; surely we have the strength and courage to practice morality without the security blanket of imagined certainty. Provisions against murder make total pragmatic sense; it is in everyone’s rational self-interest to live in a society where murder is outlawed. This is true even if we cannot scientifically demonstrate that evil inheres in a murderous act in the same way that weight resides in a physical object.

Why can’t the Constitution be anchored by the great men who created it and the great nation that sustained it all these years? Why does it need the impersonal inprimatur of some holy underwriter or eternal stamp?

Besides, it’s narcissistic (and naive) to project your values onto the fault lines of nature. This kind of thing leads to big government hubris where we try to forcibly stamp our way of life on other nations.

Values and beliefs change over time. Indeed, I’m glad the the American values of the 1800s - the ones where women were seen as too irrational for civic function - were expunged by history. I don’t mind that my values have the messy imprint of time, uncertainty, struggle and humility - and, contrary to your logic (if I'm reading it right), this relativism doesn't mean I think it’s okay to swing babies around by their feet or that I think the Muslim treatment of women is anything less than evil. I just don't need as much proof to hold these beliefs.

 

[kaz]

Sure Bubba, sure

You're so stupid it's funny. The point of this discussion is I mocked you for saying Republicans are Black and White. And you're repeating, duh, dar, you're not a Democrat (true) so you're a Republican (false). Drool, there are nothing but Republicans and Democrats, so if you're not a Democrat you have to be a Republican? What are you talking about?

That's your answer to my mocking you for being black and white, that you are black and white? Classic. What a moron.

Sure Bubba, sure

There are 2 parties (PERIOD, NO 3rd party since 1992 has done squat) the US. Weird how SOOOOOO many conservatives don't support either party, lol

Libertarians are frauds and parasites. Period

We are parasites, not wanting government money. LOL. you are a tool.

Yeah, I just love that "logic." Of course, it's just another example of the liberal propaganda technique where they accuse their critics of everything they are guilty of.

Libertarians are frauds and parasites but unfortunately have been successful in hiding their dangerous disease under war hating, and freedom loving. Sadly their freedom isn't freedom, it is chaos and opens the door to a real loss of democracy.



They unwittingly use the protections, benefits and accomplishments government has to offer to create their fortunes, while pompously declaring they did it all on their own.

Clueless igets, everyone.

LOL, the idea of government not taking care of you is just pure terror, isn't it?

 

[kaz]

Bull, you did nothing to "set up" the system. I created my company, I funded "the system." You are just a parasite.

Right, you didn't BENEFIT from our roads, schools, military, etc.

Fukkking dumbass, go do it in a 3rd world nation then!!

That isn't what I said, Einstein. You had nothing to do with roads, schools and the military. I funded those. Businesses drive our economy. You had nothing to do with providing them. Illiteracy sucks. If you went to college, you should sue them to get your money back.

Ask them..they just threw your ass out of the senate.

just a mere handful did....it was the lowest participation in an election in 40 years.... all liberals have to do in 2016 is show up to vote, then your ass is grass again.... but you all know that, this is why the republicans always focus on reducing the numbers that vote, like gvt picture voter id laws and reducing the number of days early voting is available and reducing the hours of early voting, and reducing the number of voting machines in crowded democratic districts, and telling students they should stay home election day, and promoting that women shouldn't vote etc etc etc etc....

IT'S ALL ABOUT trying to STOP citizens from voting for Republicans....they know it is the only way they can win...

Sorry to break it to you, but it's a handful either way.

Let's see fact based evidence of your claims.

You really think you lost Colorado because the GOP blocked voting ?

Please, run for office.....you'd make it easy for us.

I didn't say they won because they BLOCKED voting, you made that up yourself....

Then you can explain the democrats loss of a key senate seat in Colorado.

Looking forward to it.

A president’s party rarely does well in midterm elections, and that’s been particularly true in a president’s second term. And the country has still not fully recovered from the Great Recession



Colorado voters elected Representative Cory Gardner, the Republican challenger, as their new senator on Tuesday, rejecting the incumbent Mark Udall as a Democrat too closely tied to President Obama and as a candidate who ran a one-note campaign focused on the politics of abortion.

Mr. Udall’s campaign echoed what Republicans called a “war on women” strategy, casting Mr. Gardner as a rigid opponent of abortion who supported legal rights for embryos and whose positions could outlaw some forms of birth control.



Mr. Gardner’s camp did everything possible to weld Mr. Udall and Mr. Obama together in voters’ minds, focusing in particular on Mr. Udall’s support for a health care overhaul. Ad after ad by Republicans and outside conservative groups declared that Mr. Udall voted with the president 99 percent of the time.

“Coloradans, it doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or a Democrat. They want someone who’s independent, who’s there for them. It’s really a Western thing.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/us/udall-loses-senate-seat-to-gardner-a-republican.html

These midterms were losses on historic levels. You can write them off if you like without dealing with that, please do.

 

[JoeB131]

Social Security will eventually go to a hand to mouth set up when the surplus goes away.

It won't go bankrupt. But all the seniors you've duped into living on 1000/month will be living on 759/month.

That's a raging success.

Eventually, we will do what we should have done all along- tax the rich appropriately to pay back those bonds and means test is so we aren't writing out huge checks to rich people.

 

[JoeB131]

These midterms were losses on historic levels. You can write them off if you like without dealing with that, please do.

These midterms were apathy on historic levels. The lowest voter participation rate since 1942. Winning because no one showed up to vote is not a mandate.

 

[JoeB131]

agree, and not one of the liberal posters has grasped that very basic concept. Apparently they want their lives controlled by a small group of super elites like Gruber. Apparently they agree with him that they are too stupid to make their own decisions.

Or we realize that on the local level, government tends to be more corrupt and less efficient. More corrupt because there's no scrutiny on it. Less efficient because it lacks the resources to do important things.

You guys make a big deal about what Gruber has already apologized for, but the fact is, just reading a lot of the posts here, he has a point. Sarah Palin says stuff about death panels and you guys totally buy into that.

 

[rightwinger]

8 years of Dubya/GOP 'job creator' policies and they lot 1+ million jobs inn 8 years (NOT including the 4+ million lost in 2009)

BOOOOOOOSH lol

Yup...thats about all GOP icon Bush did

 

[rightwinger]

You're so stupid it's funny. The point of this discussion is I mocked you for saying Republicans are Black and White. And you're repeating, duh, dar, you're not a Democrat (true) so you're a Republican (false). Drool, there are nothing but Republicans and Democrats, so if you're not a Democrat you have to be a Republican? What are you talking about?

That's your answer to my mocking you for being black and white, that you are black and white? Classic. What a moron.

Sure Bubba, sure

There are 2 parties (PERIOD, NO 3rd party since 1992 has done squat) the US. Weird how SOOOOOO many conservatives don't support either party, lol

Libertarians are frauds and parasites. Period

We are parasites, not wanting government money. LOL. you are a tool.

Yeah, I just love that "logic." Of course, it's just another example of the liberal propaganda technique where they accuse their critics of everything they are guilty of.

Libertarians are frauds and parasites but unfortunately have been successful in hiding their dangerous disease under war hating, and freedom loving. Sadly their freedom isn't freedom, it is chaos and opens the door to a real loss of democracy.



They unwittingly use the protections, benefits and accomplishments government has to offer to create their fortunes, while pompously declaring they did it all on their own.

Clueless igets, everyone.

LOL, the idea of government not taking care of you is just pure terror, isn't it?

I should be able to take care of myself, but if god forbid, something were to happen to me I like the idea that the government is there to take care of me

 

[Mathbud1]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Define "level playing field."

And do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

OK
There is a delicate balance between capitalists and labor. In recent years we have valued money earned through capitalism more than that earned through labor. Our economic policies are crafted by the capitalists and designed to minimize the collective power of labor

That does not at all define "level playing field." Can you please describe what you would see as a level playing field.

Also, do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

 

[Mathbud1]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

everyone wants to help those who need help. Where in the USA today is the playing field not level? Do you want more affrimative action that penalizes the majorities?

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?

OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field

Does that mean you want to eliminate all wealth?

Or do you want to eliminate legislation?

Or something else?

Why do you guys always come back with such stupid responses?

How does advocating policies that don't directly make the rich wealthier equate to "eliminate all wealth"?

How is that a stupid response?

You said that the wealthy class has a " disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps."

I assumed that you meant they had such a say because they are able to spend their money to influence legislators.

How would you stop that?

I gave you two options that would stop that influence: eliminating wealth, or eliminating legislation. I also gave you the all-important third option: something else. A free pass to explain in your own words what you actually meant.

So?

 

[Seawytch]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Define "level playing field."

And do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

OK
There is a delicate balance between capitalists and labor. In recent years we have valued money earned through capitalism more than that earned through labor. Our economic policies are crafted by the capitalists and designed to minimize the collective power of labor

That does not at all define "level playing field." Can you please describe what you would see as a level playing field.

Equal opportunities. A place where everyone plays by the same rules and not having separate rules if you're rich or white than if you're poor or a minority.

Also, do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

We the people my friend. Our government is us. We the people collectively bettering its society by having social programs that do that. Did you know that Social Security drastically reduced the number of elderly in poverty?

Were you aware that the ACA has reduced the number of people without heath insurance by a large margin?

 

[rightwinger]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Define "level playing field."

And do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

OK
There is a delicate balance between capitalists and labor. In recent years we have valued money earned through capitalism more than that earned through labor. Our economic policies are crafted by the capitalists and designed to minimize the collective power of labor

That does not at all define "level playing field." Can you please describe what you would see as a level playing field.

Also, do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

That is a level playing field between the capitalists who make money through investing and workers who make money through labor

There used to be a time when we valued our workers. They had an expectation that if you worked hard and were loyal to your employer that you could support your family, have a decent quality of life and someday retire.
We used to expect more of our capitalists. Expected them to pay a decent wage to those producing their wealth, expected them to contribute more to the society from which they benefit so much. But we sold out to supply side economics

Now, who should "help those who need helping"?

I would like to see more of the burden shifted to the capitalist. Right now, it is the government (taxpayers) who are making up the difference in substandard wages

 

[rightwinger]

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

everyone wants to help those who need help. Where in the USA today is the playing field not level? Do you want more affrimative action that penalizes the majorities?

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?

OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field

Does that mean you want to eliminate all wealth?

Or do you want to eliminate legislation?

Or something else?

Why do you guys always come back with such stupid responses?

How does advocating policies that don't directly make the rich wealthier equate to "eliminate all wealth"?

How is that a stupid response?

You said that the wealthy class has a " disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps."

I assumed that you meant they had such a say because they are able to spend their money to influence legislators.

How would you stop that?

I gave you two options that would stop that influence: eliminating wealth, or eliminating legislation. I also gave you the all-important third option: something else. A free pass to explain in your own words what you actually meant.

So?

Your response:
Does that mean you want to eliminate all wealth?

Totally unrelated to what I posted

 

[Dogmaphobe]

That is a level playing field between the capitalists who make money through investing and workers who make money through labor

There used to be a time when we valued our workers. They had an expectation that if you worked hard and were loyal to your employer that you could support your family, have a decent quality of life and someday retire.
We used to expect more of our capitalists. Expected them to pay a decent wage to those producing their wealth, expected them to contribute more to the society from which they benefit so much. But we sold out to supply side economics

Now, who should "help those who need helping"?

I would like to see more of the burden shifted to the capitalist. Right now, it is the government (taxpayers) who are making up the difference in substandard wages

I always find it amusing when so many people wax poetic about those halcyon days between WW2 and the mid sixties, which they invariably represent in terms of conservative values.

They should take a look at the tax rates then.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

How is that a stupid response?

You said that the wealthy class has a " disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps."

I assumed that you meant they had such a say because they are able to spend their money to influence legislators.

How would you stop that?

I gave you two options that would stop that influence: eliminating wealth, or eliminating legislation. I also gave you the all-important third option: something else. A free pass to explain in your own words what you actually meant.

So?

Something else could include doing away with the sophistry that a corporation is a person, or re-implementing the fairness doctrine.

When Reagan eliminated the fairness doctrine that served us well for all those years, he did so at the behest of those who realized that they could better control the message. This is not a direct way to influence legislators (who need very little in the first place since they are in the same social class), but it does provide the groundswell of support for electing them.