What if our media would be kind enough to allow politicians not backed by big money?

[pvsi.]

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

 

[SniperFire]

Are you still promoting capital punishment for candidates who promote themselves beyond your state media, commie?

 

[occupied]

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

No such thing as a decent politician running for national office, there may have been some in the past but in today's political landscape decent people are at too much of a disadvantage to run with that pack of hyenas who attack decency like a limping antelope.

 

[OODA_Loop]

No such thing as a decent politician running for national office.

That is a bit bold, no ?

 

[pvsi.]

Are you still promoting capital punishment for candidates who promote themselves beyond your state media, commie?

You are a true definition of n asshole, show me a link where I said anything like that, and if it's the video, quote the text part and what mark.

 

[occupied]

No such thing as a decent politician running for national office.

That is a bit bold, no ?

Why would anyone run for congress knowing how corrupt and bought off it is unless they are looking to belly up to the lobbyist feed trough also? Do you really think any of them run to help their state and districts? If they did it did not last any longer than a free "fact finding" junket to Napa Valley or Hawaii.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

Here's the deal.....The media is 100% responsible for the money in politics.
Why? Because the media corps require payment for their air time. So, political candidates must beg borrow and suck up to rich people and businesses for donations so they can run their shitty and annoying attack ads against each other.
One of two things need to occur before your dream becomes reality.
Free air time...Or...Make it SO expensive that no political candidate would bother to buy time.
Either way, the whole system sucks sideways.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It has nothing to do with ‘the media.’

It has to do with apathetic voters too lazy to do the hard work necessary to bring about actual change.

 

[jasonnfree]

They are the public airways. Or public funded election, maybe a short election cycle and crack down on lobbyists. Only a dream? Probably considering most people don't even vote and some of them because they know money buys elections so what's the use.

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

Here's the deal.....The media is 100% responsible for the money in politics.
Why? Because the media corps require payment for their air time. So, political candidates must beg borrow and suck up to rich people and businesses for donations so they can run their shitty and annoying attack ads against each other.
One of two things need to occur before your dream becomes reality.
Free air time...Or...Make it SO expensive that no political candidate would bother to buy time.
Either way, the whole system sucks sideways.

 

[konradv]

Public financing, anyone? How else to break the Republicrat/Koch-Soros duopoly?

Other solutions seem to amount to telling everyone how they should be voting or bemoaning the level of education in the country. Probably both true, but ineffective as strategies.

 

[pvsi.]

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

Here's the deal.....The media is 100% responsible for the money in politics.
Why? Because the media corps require payment for their air time. So, political candidates must beg borrow and suck up to rich people and businesses for donations so they can run their shitty and annoying attack ads against each other.
One of two things need to occur before your dream becomes reality.
Free air time...Or...Make it SO expensive that no political candidate would bother to buy time.
Either way, the whole system sucks sideways.

pvsi.net - People versus Special Interests is precisely about that and it states so clearly, but I like the way you put it

 

[The T]

It has nothing to do with ‘the media.’

It has to do with apathetic voters too lazy to do the hard work necessary to bring about actual change.

they DID...they voted In Obama...and HOW well has that worked so far?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Public financing, anyone? How else to break the Republicrat/Koch-Soros duopoly?

Other solutions seem to amount to telling everyone how they should be voting or bemoaning the level of education in the country. Probably both true, but ineffective as strategies.

 

[g5000]

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

No such thing as a decent politician running for national office, there may have been some in the past but in today's political landscape decent people are at too much of a disadvantage to run with that pack of hyenas who attack decency like a limping antelope.

Yes. This.

Or...as Alexis de Tocqueville put it:

In the United States the people do not hate the higher classes of society, but are not favorably inclined towards them and carefully exclude them from the exercise of authority. They do not fear distinguished talents, but are rarely fond of them. In general, everyone who rises without their aid seldom obtains their favor.

While the natural instincts of democracy induce the people to reject distinguished citizens as their rulers, an instinct not less strong induces able men to retire from the political arena, in which it is so difficult to retain their independence, or to advance without becoming servile.

 

[konradv]

What if our media would be nice enough to allow decent politicians onto political debates, who have something legitimate to say, instead of accusing each other as the two party circus clowns have been doing for decades? do you think our establishment media could do that, or no chance?

Here's the deal.....The media is 100% responsible for the money in politics.
Why? Because the media corps require payment for their air time. So, political candidates must beg borrow and suck up to rich people and businesses for donations so they can run their shitty and annoying attack ads against each other.
One of two things need to occur before your dream becomes reality.
Free air time...Or...Make it SO expensive that no political candidate would bother to buy time.
Either way, the whole system sucks sideways.

pvsi.net - People versus Special Interests is precisely about that and it states so clearly, but I like the way you put it

It seems like more of "we should all be doing this" that never gets anywhere. It's not a solution; it's a pipe dream.

 

[The T]

Public financing, anyone? How else to break the Republicrat/Koch-Soros duopoly?

Other solutions seem to amount to telling everyone how they should be voting or bemoaning the level of education in the country. Probably both true, but ineffective as strategies.

Applaud Communists regularly do you?

 

[thereisnospoon]

It has nothing to do with ‘the media.’

It has to do with apathetic voters too lazy to do the hard work necessary to bring about actual change.

they DID...they voted In Obama...and HOW well has that worked so far?

The irony of Obama's win vs his policies is this: While black voters selected Obama at over 98%, it was white suburban moderates who put Obama over the top. It is those same suburbanites that Obama despises. Obama has a chip on his shoulder for these people and the idea of suburbs themselves. Like all new urbanist/ smart growth people Obama believes that people left cities due to racism and taxation.
The fact is, higher wages and the availability of relatively inexpensive land enabled common ordinary hard working people to escape the crime and over crowding of urban centers.
To combat this, city leaders developed a plan to bring back these people through involuntary annexation. Several states permit this. Florida is the most notorious. One write quipped that the annexation laws in Florida were so liberal and vague that southeast Georgia was in jeopardy. In fact this bears out. The city of Jacksonville is the largest single municipality in the US at 874.3 square miles or every square inch of Duval County.
In other states such as North Carolina, county boundaries are no barrier to this "reach out and grab".
Other greedy ways for cities to prevent people from leaving are so called Smart Growth policies.
The concept was to prevent urban sprawl..The real reason was to prevent the development of suburbs. This helps place road blocks in front of those who wish to leave the city.
What occurred was a tragic and meteoric rise in home prices due to an artificially created shortage. This forced people to move to far flung locations which made it inefficient and difficult to commute to and from work.
Smart Growth and annexation are the result of resentment by city leaders toward those to dared to move out of the reach of their influence.
The question is, will those same white suburban moderates vote for Obama again?
If not, Obama loses the election.
Let's hope the suburbanites come to their senses.

 

[Leweman]

It has nothing to do with ‘the media.’

It has to do with apathetic voters too lazy to do the hard work necessary to bring about actual change.

true ... the two parties keep us pitted against each other without bringing about any real changes so we stay distracted while they get rich. They love the lazy, distracted voters. The truth is both sides of politicians are pointing at each other with one hand but are high fiving each other with the other. We need to end this two party system and the culture of career politicians in Washington.

 

[SniperFire]

Are you still promoting capital punishment for candidates who promote themselves beyond your state media, commie?

You are a true definition of n asshole, show me a link where I said anything like that, and if it's the video, quote the text part and what mark.

LOL

You must have changed your platform.