American politics today is rife with corruption and mediocrity. We live in a society so obsessed with uncovering scandals and adhering to political correctness that only the naïvely optimistic, the mediocre, the hypocrite, the criminal, or the totally clueless ever dare to poke their heads above the relative safety of the crowd and attempt to distinguish themselves in political office. The rest of the people are too smart – or too fearful – to risk humiliation at best – and the utter destruction of their lives and careers at worse.
Rarely in modern American politics do we find true leaders who inspire and guide us with wisdom. The truth of this statement is obvious when looking among the current crop of presidential candidates. You do not find men and women of vision, personal courage and unwavering conviction. Instead you discover seasoned professionals with public speaking coaches and image consultants; researchers and advisors to help them craft their positions on every issue; PR mavens to craft their public images; hairstylists to comb their hair and wardrobe consultants to select their clothes; and scores of other support staff that would make the massive posses of the most ego-centric celebrities green with envy.
The freshness and promise of campaigns like those of Barack Obama – who entered the race full of optimism – quickly grow stale and begin to stink like all the others. When he once spoke freely and warmly to the crowd, he now measures his words, dodges direct questions, badmouths his opponents, and testily pushes back reporters who lob politically charged questions at him.
Blame it on the media. Journalists, who profess to being intelligent and impartial, should know better; yet they are the worst offenders. Controversy sells newspapers. They are the first to turn an innocent phrase into an ugly controversy that leaves political candidates twisting in the wind. Promising careers grind to a halt; dedicated civil servants quickly learn that they must become cagey hypocrites if they are to survive as career politicians.
Savvy broadcasters bait their audiences by making the wildest accusations against public figures to help boost their ratings and sell their next book. Even the most respected journalists lie in waiting for politicians to make the most innocent comments that can be twisted into ugly phrases. If a politician should innocently admit he is not aware of a minor news item – they will label him ignorant of world events. If a politician should have a thoughtful change of heart about a key political issue, they will damn him as a flip-flopper. If a politician should have a bad hair day, they will call him incompetent to serve office. If a politician should stumble coming out of a plane, they will say he is a bumbling buffoon incapable of running the country.
When politicians meet to debate, the media does not rate them on the quality of their answers, their insight or their devotion to the cause of helping the American people. Instead, the media rates them on their posture; how they spoke, how well they dressed; and how effectively they could zing their opponents with a well-turned phrase.
Therefore, to the honest, intelligent and dedicated person who is thinking about running for office and build a better America, God bless you. And wear a safety helmet!
-------------------------
Mario’s column, Point of Convergence, published to Gather Essentials: Politics, looks at the American political landscape and the people and events that make the news. Mario is a culture trend expert who frequently speaks on cultural, political and social issues that impact modern life. Keep up with Mario’s other postings and Gather activity by joining his Gather network. Just click popculture and select the orange “Connect” button on the left side of the page.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 109
The (not so) hidden message: Don't expect the government to do what's good for YOU.
Shouldn't WE just DEMAND MORE from our government? At one point or another, way back when, I was pretty sure we had a right to do that...
In fact, if you REALLY believed that crapola, revolution is your DUTY ! ! ! !
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.
THOSE words my brother, are your marching orders. If YOU really believe the government is what YOU say it is, you should quit your whining and get a gun.
Simmer down now . . . Marching orders?
" . . . it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it . . . "
What that means is that Mario has every right, and it could be argued; duty, to speak of the corrupted institutions and persons he may see evidence of. I have no idea what world you have been observing, which would cause the slightest shock or incredulity at the rather mild approach he here employs in outlining some of the less desirable pressures involved in national politics.
I find your implication; that to even discuss such things is akin to violent uprising, to be evidence that Mario has understated the seriousness of our plight, if anything. The failure of most citizens to even realize they are the "bosses" of this "company" . . . is a catastrophic failure of the republic (assuming one actually listens to those words it was founded upon). That you would freak out because he mentioned the sorry state of American leadership selection methods is fine black humor, really.
I must agree with Richard on his assessment of the basic problem. We have what we made, it is a reflection of the "will of the people". Folks are gonna have to change in some pretty fundamental ways to get things "back on course".
I really don't believe we're going to make it in the end, but of course, it's always correct to struggle mightily to deny such a fate's unfolding.
Mary-0 isn't "discussing" anything here, he's stating it FLAT OUT ! ! !
He's made a blanket statement attempting to denigrate 535 men and women in the Legislative branch, the entire Executive branch, and all state government institutions in all fifty states. It is PREPOSTEROUS on its face.
And yes, DUTY is what the Declaration of Independence calls it, when your current form of government betrays you, and the need arises to start over.
Look, if someone believes their government is so corrupt they no longer represent the people they serve, it is their DUTY to abolish that form of government and institute new forms of government that WILL represent them.
There IS NO "SORRY" STATE OF AMERICA except in your freakin' MIND ! ! ! ! !
We are the lone super power on earth, militarily and economically. That doesn't mean we're perfect, or that we don't have corrupt people, it just means the "sorry state of America" is someone's fantasy.
Plight ??? Piffle. There is no "plight" to be whining about.
John - the truth is that people will never change. Corruption has existed from the time of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden - and every single recorded government has been rotten at the core in one way or another. Like you point out, it's human nature - we don't have to like it or accept it, but I hold no hope things will ever change.
You seem to see "problems" where NONE exist.
Corruption has existed from the time of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden
I see, so you don't just hate the USA, you're just a misanthrope by principle *ROFL*
You are apparently a big proponent of the "three monkeys" approach. Your reasoning is impeccable;
"We are the lone super power on earth, militarily and economically. That doesn't mean we're perfect, or that we don't have corrupt people, it just means the "sorry state of America" is someone's fantasy."
Unfortunately, it makes no allowance for the passage of time. ALL once great powers were once great, and inhabitants could make the sort of statement you made . . . right up till the deniable realities were undeniable. Surely every society has had opportunities to make corrections, and some members have tried to encourage action before the cause was lost . . . no doubt while folks of your ilk ridiculed every attempt to point out the signs of decay and collapse, for whatever petty comfort they got out of believing all was well.
A great tree cut three quarters through is still quite tall, for the moment.
> That being: "Would you want our government to be in charge of your healthcare?"
This is the perfect example of a vapid Republican argument and how they get people to unthinkingly vote their way. First you spend 20-30 years irrationally demonizing government while you spend billions corrupting it and taking it over to serve a minority of the people. Then for the things you want to get rid of you aim the demoning at them specifically, while not saying anything about the programs you want to encourage, or the total incompetence in American corporations ... like the inability after 20+ years of competition to hold on to our own domestic car market.
But nevermind that, quick slogans really impress the not very bright who do not bother to think or question.
> The (not so) hidden message: Don't expect the government
> to do what's good for YOU.
Who should we expect to do what's good for us, then?
Yeah, no one, if you're being honest.
Government is supposed to be the maker of the rules. We put what
we believe in laws that are supposed to be accessible and known to
all, and then we argue about how to live up to them. At least there
is a chance for that to work if people understand and are fair.
If we toss government and hope vainly for private people to be
good and moral and nice to us, who is trying to push an absurdity
B Robert but you?
Congress is neither stupid and corrupt, as suggested, nor does it function efficiently either. The vast majority of people running for Congress desire to make a difference, though they differ greatly on 1) what that difference is, and 2) how best to achieve it. Unfortunately some of what has been suggested is true - the partisan bureaucracy tends to largely neuter agents of non-partisan action, in part because of the need for reelection (every two years in the House, six years in the Senate).
Which gets to the real problem. Us. We, the people, need to alter our expectations and actually hold our representatives accountable for doing "the peoples business." Unfortunately we reward patronizing activities (reelect Congressman A because he got us 200 million dollars for a bridge, and oh, because I've heard his name before and I haven't heard of the other guy). While we clearly can't become experts on every issue, we can - and should - expect our representatives to be rational in their thinking and communicate to us the basis for their decision making. If they cannot be transparent and communicate with us, then we should vote them out. This requires responsibility on our part to accept that sometimes our representatives must make decisions for the greater good and not just agree with us 100% of the time.
As for the media, the media play the "scorecard" game (who won, who looks better in a blue suit and red tie [or pink], who will be raked through the burning embers because he accidently said "lawyer" in a context he shouldn't have) in the debates rather than analyze the actual issues. Why? Because it gets them ratings. Why does it get them ratings? Because most of us are not taking the time to understand the full breadth of the issues and seem to get interested enough to even pay attention when there is some "controversy" swirling around about some mis-statement made under the pressure of a debate. [Which strikes me as incredibly bizarre, given that our current President is famous for malapropisms, yet we elected him twice. So why is it so important to sensationalize every word we can parse from current candidates? Don't we have anything more important to do?]
In addition (getting back to my point about we the people), we allow ourselves to be swayed by deceptive and negative campaign ads because we don't bother to critically evaluate the information or even read between the lines. For example, I recently received an envelope in the mail that looked like an official County Tax office notice. Inside was an official looking document suggesting that my new taxes would be due soon. After some searching I was able to discern that it was actually a campaign ad by the incumbent asserting that the challenger would immediately raise taxes if elected. The campaign ad purposely sought to deceive the recipient into thinking it was an official County agency notice. This absolute use of deception tells me that the incumbent is using falsehood and fear to confuse voters into reelecting him. And it will work with many voters because they will choose to believe it at face value and not even bother to consider that the deception involved is not something we should want our elected officials to be undertaking.
So, Mario and others, if you don't like what Congress is doing, then do something about it. Stop whining for dollars on Gather and start making phone calls. Run for office if you think you can do a better job. Advocate for change. Pick an issue and devote some time to researching it, communicating it, and helping to find a resolution. But stop the partisan bickering and do some worthwhile.
Focus on the real problems and real issues, not generalize to the point of irrelevancy and paralysis.
One might think that voting them out and changing them would help, but with the economic and media powers the way they are, we just get churning, not anything different.
If we remove privating funding, we might get different leaderse, but also all leaders with all kind of incompatible ideas that cannot work together that will lead to fragmenttaion of the country. We have an "empire" to lead and cannot afford fragmentation ... if we fragment many of us will really lose bigtime.
As I see it anway,. we need to run with what we have, but we need to change incrementally. This would mean going back to moderates, which would mean taking control of the media at least in terms of something like breaking up ownership monopoloies and removing large corporate ownership from the media outlets and weill as reinstating some form of fairness doctrine.
Also, cutting way back on corporate lobbying, or making it totally transparent. Right now we have foreign lobbyists influencing our politicans and law to an extent we do not even see and are not allowed to.
By the way, when I said empire, I meant it more as a consortium, confederation of Western countries, or hegemony than an empire in the mold of Rome.
"And it will work with many voters because they will choose to believe it at face value and not even bother to consider that the deception involved is not something we should want our elected officials to be undertaking."
Um, that's kinda what Mario is pointing out. The FACT that such tactics work on most voters means assholes have a huge advantage in politics. That in turn means that many assholes will be elected, and that many non-assholes will turn once they see the virtual necessity of doing so.
At some point such a situation produces a hopelessly corrupt election system. Mario, and many others, believe we are near if not beyond that point. You may believe in some miraculous corrective force which will always return us to a workable system for non-assholes . . . but it's really silly to pretend those who see no signs of such a miraculous force are the unrealistic ones.
It can break, if twisted too far. Even without your permission.
The "it can't happen here" routine is getting very old. It can, and mindlessly criticizing any who speak of that possibility is pointless, at best. If you feel things are just not that bad yet, so be it, but please start giving some rational reasons for your position. Just reciting the same old crap about the future being a continuation of the past is not cutting it. What will stop things from getting worse? Please be specific.
Everybody says I'm an idiot, and and David is a genius.
Brucie, you're just jealous you can't string the syllables together the way a pro like me is able to do.
Notice, they don't bother addressing me, they just want to call me names, while the castigate me for calling them names *ROFL*
freakin' hypocrite RUBES ! ! ! ! !
Atleast Mary-0 "gets it" when I post, and freely admits I'm not the moron the asswipes suggest, simply because I refuse to submit to their silly ideas of decorum.
> together the way a pro like me is able to do.
No, I just wish I was 13 years old again ... but not if I was so stupid.
I disagree that our republic is a government by politicians. It is a representative government in which we the people have simply not been holding ourselves accountable for our own responsibilities in this matter. How can we expect our representatives to be accountable themselves if we consistently reward them for partisanship? And this is what we do.
I also disagree with the tendency to blame all this on "corporate ownership." We vote people in and out of office, not the corporations. Removing large corporate ownership from media outlets is impossible unless the government steps in to run all the media outlets. I can't see how that is an improvement.
Lobbying will always happen, and it's not always a bad thing (unions lobby for worker rights, environmentalists lobby for the environment, etc.) Transparency is the key. Hard to hide in the dark when the lights are on.
Use of profanity and, frankly, just plain rudeness, is a sign of a weak argument and personal insecurity. It resolves nothing and denigrates your own credibility. There are commenters above that make some good points, but who is likely to listen to someone who is swearing at them and calling them names? A little decorum goes a long way. Respect honest views, demand evidence to support them (unless they are identified as opinions, which won't have evidence), and state your best case in a respectful way.
Well, I never thought of it as a rule exactly, but in a corrupt system, of course, it pretty much amounts to one. Yes, I see the roots of our current decline in the way we raise our children to a great extent. We have come to see the institutional process as "natural", when of course it is anything but. Separating children into age based groups, and substituting official truth givers for real interaction in society is profoundly stupid, but cheap. Things like the "bullying" problem are virtually guaranteed, and kids will learn to accept authoritarian rule before they even know there is any alternative.
We are so far down the path of compartmentalization that I see no real hope of salvaging the current educational forms we have adopted, and we will continue to churn out worshipers of whatever "chieftains" emerge, regardless of their motives or tactics. We are becoming a society of cowards, who simply pick which fearful things to lend their resistance too. Fear will eat us up, one way or another.
John, perhaps it does start with how we raise our children. When they see adults reacting with intolerance to ideas that are different from their own - they begin to believe that that is the appropriate way to act.
You people *chuckle* you all take yourselves so freakin' SERIOUSLY as if anyone but other gatherers are actually reading our trite opinions.
You want to pretend your "deep" and meaningful "conversations "mean" something, and that you're "serious" about the issues. What a larf.
I don't have any idea why someone couldn't be serious, and have a good larf doing it.
Look, the day the level of discourse rises to professionalism, I'll be the first one to emulate what I see others doing. As it is, all I see is a bunch of posers pretending to be pundits, and expert pundits at that.
Mister Rational here, apparently doesn't like the fact we say basically the same freakin' thing, he just does it with conformity, and an eye toward "solving" the so called "problems" being discussed.
If you really believe people posting their jibberish on glorified message boards accomplishes the goal of "solving" ANYTHING, you're under the type of delusions where ridicule is the only logical response.
you make a good point about profanity in posted comments - they will always minimize the validity of an argument
Why ???? Because someone uses the word "fuck" his opinion is less valid ???? Says who ??? Little miss manners ???? *ROFL*
Name calling is often the ONLY LOGICAL RESPONSE to some of you dimwits attempting to pose as political insiders.
Believe me, I have a great deal of intolerance for mental midgets pretending to be experts in the field, pretending to know better than the president of the USA what should be done, and what shouldn't, all the while calling Bush a "liar" and "corrupt" and whatever else you want to call him.
Mary-O's ENTIRE ARTICLE WAS NOTHING BUT NAME CALLING, and you want to riducule me for following suit ???? *ROFL*
We live in a society so obsessed with uncovering scandals and adhering to political correctness that only the naïvely optimistic, the mediocre, the hypocrite, the criminal, or the totally clueless ever dare to poke their heads above the relative safety of the crowd and attempt to distinguish themselves in political office.
This isn't name calling ???? *ROFL*
You do not find men and women of vision, personal courage and unwavering conviction. Instead you discover seasoned professionals with public speaking coaches and image consultants; researchers and advisors to help them craft their positions on every issue; PR mavens to craft their public images; hairstylists to comb their hair and wardrobe consultants to select their clothes; and scores of other support staff that would make the massive posses of the most ego-centric celebrities green with envy.
Yet more name calling, and you want to pretend you're just presenting the "facts?" *ROFL*
You people condemning me, and I don't include you Mary-0, you people condemning me for simply following suit are HYPOCRITES in the extreme.
Mary-0 takes whatever I give him, and yet NEVER resorts to calling me names the way you weeners do, NEVER..... in fact he often compliments me.
Take a cue from Mary-O, quite calling people names, and I think you'd be surprised how quickly I "stick to the issues."
Otherwise, shut your freakin' mouths, and deal with it, losers. *chuckle*
> It is a representative government in which we the
> people have simply not been holding ourselves
> accountable for our own responsibilities in this matter
Very true ... but we the people have had a lot of help,
including all kinds of games to separate us from power,
but it is our collective fault ... or maybe our collective
fault that we have a marginal supply of stupid people
who make the democratic process just noise.
What a rube.
I think Mr. Bush is a corrupt liar.
Why is that impossible in your world? Have there NEVER been corrupt liars in charge of countries? Or is it just YOUR leader who must be wise and good?
I'm quite baffled by your odd conclusion that this is not a "real" conversation. Could you please point me to where the "real people" are discussing things?
You seem to be a fine example of the product of our education methods I spoke of earlier. You seem not to consider yourself a real person, but some sort of child-like being just hanging out in class while the real people run the real world . . . Authoritarian "believer" to the bone.
Who said impossible ?? I said merely, it is name calling, and it is. I have said YOU HAVE NO PROOF he's a liar, and you don't. I've never said he ISN'T a liar, or that it was impossible, I've simply pointed out there is NO PROOF for the empty accusation, and therefore it is nothing more than simple name calling.
I'm quite baffled by your odd conclusion that this is not a "real" conversation.
Then you're not comprehending what you are reading. Even two idiots can have a "real" conversation, complete with slobber oozing down their chins, big deal.
What I meant, and what I believe you know I meant, is that it isn't "real" in the sense that anything we say here, will impact anyone in Washington. It isn't "real" in the sense that, the pretenders and the posers, the intellectual wannabes that believe what they have to say is on par with PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS.
The "real" people that actually could have an impact on the opinions and minds of others, are the pros, not these aping clowns that regurgitate what they see on the sunday news programs as if it is their own original thought.
We ARE just a bunch of fakes, phoneys, and posers, pretending to be deep and insightful while hanging out here at gather.
If YOU want to pretend you're something more than just some guy, with an opinion, that's fine by me, but please don't expect me to indulge your silly delusions.
"YOU HAVE NO PROOF he's a liar"
Oh, and just what "proof" is required? Are we talking "what the definition of is, is"? We were lied into war dude, and multitudes have died. I really don't give a crap if you are too dense to realize you were lied to, I'm not.
"The "real" people that actually could have an impact on the opinions and minds of others, are the pros"
Oh, a worshipper of Mammon. That explains things.
What proof is required ?? Well, Clinton admitted he lied, after it was proven, and paid the price.
What "proof" is required for your empty claim of Bush being a liar ???
You know, beyond a reasonable doubt kind of proof, say-- IMPEACHMENT you cowards, or whatever other sort of TRIAL you put criminal LIARS under, I don't care ! ! !
But there must be some measure, some validity to the claim that is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, otherwise, in THIS country, you're INNOCENT until that PROOF is presented.
We weren't "lied into war," that's just your silly assed OPINION and NOTHING you can PROVE ! ! ! !
I don't really give a crapola if YOU want to pretend YOU have the "facts" rather than a mere opinion. Just don't be surprised when someone like me calls you names for such arrogant stupidity.
"But there must be some measure, some validity to the claim that is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, otherwise, in THIS country, you're INNOCENT until that PROOF is presented."
NO, NO, NO. That is in a court of law. YOU ARE WRONG, as usual.
It's all about AUTHORITY to you. And that is so freakin silly, cause there ARE no authorities, just people. The "authorities" bicker and squabble, and you get to deny anything you like. Congratulations, you've discovered a handy excuse to deny anything you wish.
Call me names? Oh, spare me you fool.
That's right asswipe, no other method is available to prove your silly, empty accusations. IMPEACHMENT is the only recourse you have to "prove" your partisan rhetoric.
Too bad the democraps know they don't even have enough proof to CENSURE Bush, much less impeach the guy, but hey, YOU KNOW Bush is a liar ??? *ROFL*
Authority is all there is sprout, and you don't have any, which is probably what pisses you off, and forces you to pretend you're something you're not, and that you have proof you don't have any way of possessing.
Why would I deny you don't have proof for your empty opinions ???? It is self evident.
Call you names, sure, why not, you freakin' idiot.
spoken like a good little nazi that has begun to believe his silly opinions as fact, rather than the empty accusations they really are.
You certainly can't prove Bush lied, which is precisely why you have to call me names.
Ultra maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarooooooooooooooooooooons *ROFL*
the answer is moron ! ! ! !
"Authority is all there is sprout"
Oh, and here I thought there was a real universe, and even a God. Thanks so much for informing me that if some person X dubs some other person Y an authority, something actually comes into being. I'd have never guessed such an arrangement . . .
So, tell me. is it that Mr. Bush DIDN"T lie us into an invasion of Iraq, or that I can't "prove" he did? I mean, is it actually not a lie unless I can prove it was, or is it just your way of saying you wish everyone was as daffy and unsure about the universe as yourself?
I know! It's the new morality, the gold plated rule of Mammon;
"If you don't admit you did it, you're not guilty"
Count me out chief, I ain't playin along.
He lied. Remember Richard Clarke (Against All Enemies). He provides some rather compelling evidence that Bush wouldn't wait for Hans Blix and the inspectors because he knew they weren't finding anything. So, he cooked up the story and went with it. There's one lie that we know about. The problem with liars is that they are very convincing.
There is, and it all comes under the authority of G-d, moron.
I'd have never guessed such an arrangement . . .
You just did, as you made it up, I certainly said no such thing. I'm the one that wants PROOF remember ??? *ROFL*
So, tell me. is it that Mr. Bush DIDN"T lie us into an invasion of Iraq, or that I can't "prove" he did?
You, or anyone else-- I don't pretend to know if Bush lied or not, all I've said is that you have no proof for such an empty accusation.
"If you don't admit you did it, you're not guilty"
Yet more lunacy interpreted from what was actually said. *chuckle* you rubes like to use phrases like "so in other words" or "by your logic."
I don't need "other words" to know what I said, and the only reason you think you need "other words" is because you can't refute mine, so you try to restate my words and end up looking like the numbnuts you are.
You've done nuttin' but "play" since you started *ROFL*
There's one lie that we know about.
Well, one lie you suggest is a lie, of course, "compelling evidence" means NOTHING unless it is brought before a jury of peers.
The problem with liars is that they are very convincing.
Which probably explains why the democraps get away with lying to each other.
Yeah, I know he and his buds lied, there is all kinds of solid evidence, from Colin Powell to the Downing Street memo . . . the fix was in. Do you remember the mushroom clouds bit out of Condi and the VP? That was my favorite, it showed a lotta hutspa.
I guess Jack can go down on the record as officially taken in . . . and ya know, I don't believe him for a moment, (I think he's lying about that now, he ain't nearly as dumb as he pretends, he figures they lied).
Yes, John - he did lie to get us into Iraq. It's as obvious as the nose on your face. The mushroom cloud had me laughing when I heard it because the only mushroom clouds these days is coming from America's experiments. It was a lot of chutzpah, to be sure.
"We will bring Osama Bin Laden to Justice or Justice to Bin Laden"
Yet within a year " I just don't think about him (Bin Laden) anymore, he's not important anymore"
HE LIED ON TOP THE BODIES OF THE DEAD FOR POLITICAL GAIN!
And his worshipers call his critics "Asswipes"
How sick! What sick bastards to worship someone not worthy of respect.
Any leader in cheerleader mode could be accused of the same ... you think you are making some strong point ... Clinton was out there as well, Guiliani ... that is what you do when there is a tragedy. I bet you would look thousands of times worse if you ever had to do anything to try to inspire or unite people.
I bet the little boy that cried wolf is proud of you idiots *ROFL*
Either impeach the bushie man, or shut up you self serving morons.....
You know impeachment is not a simple question. You know that public sentiment is a part of the equation being considered about this possibility, and you know that discussions like this one are a part of the means a free society utilizes to arrive at a consensus as to weather such a disruptive process is really worth the many negative effects involved, especially as elections draw near.
You know all this, and that Mr. Bush might very well be a man so corrupt that he would mislead the public into a horrible quagmire, yet you attempt to present the totally phony appearance that the problem is that there is " no proof for such an empty accusation".
You're just not an honorable man.
Impeachment was simple enough for the republicans when they said Clinton lied, and they took him down that path. Why is impeachment so difficult now that YOU say Bush lied ???
The "public sentiment" seems to be on your side, or so you and your ilk like to suggest.
Hell, Bush's approval ratings are unprecendented really, for such a prolonged period of time.
Discussions like this one don't have ANY WEIGHT WHATSOEVER about what the government will or will not do. Hell, no one EVER changes their mind based on what they've read in a freakin' blog, and if they tell you they have, then they are too stupid for words, to be so easily swayed.
It isn't as if calling a Bush a liar is a new thing, hell--- from the day he entered office, zealots on the left have been calling him a "selected" president, and that he "stole" the election. Recent polls indicate a full third of the electorate BELIEVES that crapola.
If the elected democraps believed it, rather than just using those lies for political purposes, Bushie boy would have been impeached long ago.
What I know is what I've said, and you can't refute what I've said, so you are FORCED to attempt to denigrate me by saying I'm not "honorable."
What I know, is that your empty allegations actually hurt YOU, more than Bush, more than me, or anyone else. When you continually insist upon your fantasies, rather than engaging reality, self destruction is the only possible result.
What I know is, that when preening posturing assholes like you try to tell someone what they "know," the only person they are fooling, is themselves.
You don't know jJack *chuckle* so take your empty accusation of no honor and shove it up your progressive, mendacious ass *ROFL*
Yeah well when everyone you see or talk to is a bored moron maybe you should take a hard look at yourself.
It's an absolute jungle, only the animals wear suits and dresses. The public can only wander through the zoo with little clue...There is no choice of significance to make...One animal's the same as the next...some just look better.
I understand your point that "we the people" must refuse to support such newspapers and condemn them for their scandal-seeking methods, but it becomes a vicious cycle where the media says, "We give the people what they want." And the public says, "All they do is pander to the lowest common denominator in people." Someone has to blink to break through this impasse - and that someone should be the media, which first reports the news. Media owners have to stop chasing every penny of the Almighty Dollar - maybe settle for only 80 cents - to ensure that what they report is honest, fair and meaningful to the community.
I am not saying to report only the "good news" - that would be just as bad as reporting only the "bad news." I'm saying, report the truth. Then honest politicians won't be fearful of being honest and speaking their minds – taking risks and even making a mistake once in a while – knowing that the media isn't going to crush their careers for it.
I think what you say there is true, and the problem revolves around over simplification to a great extent. Many people just want the world to be simple and easy to comprehend, so they gobble up slogans and bumper sticker assessments as if realistic measures of the problems we, and our representatives face.
The media can, and does , make much of it's money by exploiting this desire for simplicity by using "good guy/bad guy", "they just don't get it", and "you should have everything you wish" type bullshit to appeal to our egos. The world is not simple, and these cartoon like projections rarely tell the truth about anything, but many people refuse to believe higher level reasoning is required at all in evaluating others behaviour or positions. Pandering to this childish streak in us is what the media is really doing, and it is itself entirely corrupt.
Common sense is a myth. There is nothing at all common about appropriate consideration of complex interactions in our world, we are prone to mob impulses and judgmentalism far more often. We are basically throwing tantrums about living in a rich and sophisticated universe, and longing to suckle on the imaginary breast of endless pleasure and security. We aspire to be vegetables.
what a joke....
Yeah, better to just let things fester and deteriorate . . . wouldn't want to make the assholes feel bad . . .
I think the challenge here is not to condemn our politicians for the hype and polish, they obviously have no choice. The real challenge is to look past it and the media slant and see for yourself who these folks are. Yeah, it takes some effort, but the information IS there and it's the only way to see past the haze and smoke called the media.
I couldn't agree more. There ARE many good and caring elected officials at all levels of government, but you can't just trust that they are in this or that faction or on this or that "side" of an issue. Those who make blanket condemnations are being utterly foolish, since that is precisely what the truly corrupt ones are counting on as they weave their wicked webs of deceit and greed. They KNOW we will notice the damage they do, but trust we will not have the patience or wisdom to dig deep enough to notice who exactly did what to bring it to pass.
In the great and meaningless out-crying against, or for, the powers that be, the scum loses accountability, and slips into the mass of "them".
Blame blame blame, it's the modern American way, isn't it ??
It's always so easy to blame the external world, rather than look within.
You people are pathetic.
Devin, yes, we have to look past the smoke thrown up by the media, but my point is that the politicians that survive the onslaught of the media are not always the best politicians - they're just the more crafty at dodging the bullet - case in point the current crop of presidential hopeful. How many great leaders never enter politics because they felt the indignities and compromises they'd have to endure were not worth the trouble?
I really don't get you . . . are you a politician on the take? Or got some close relative in that position? I mean, what kind of person actually discourages people from speaking in favor of looking closely at what candidates and representatives have been up to? This is VERY weird . . .
This is the nub of the matter. If we want better government, we have to take the time to make it happen. If we sit on the couch and watch TV and limit our political involvement to ranting and raving, we will get what we deserve. If we get engaged, hold people accountable. and take the time to go beyond the headlines. we can change the culture. But it is a lot of work and probably won't happen until an issue arises (such as a draft, or a shortage of gasoline, or catastrophic failure of the health system) that people simply cannot ignore.
The American political system has worked, and and the politicians have behaved, the same way since the inception of this country.
You haven't stated any "flaws" you can PROVE, that's the "problem" here sports fan. YOU want to make a BLANKET STATEMENT about the ENTIRE governmental institutions of our federal, state, and local governments.
YOU state UNEQUIVACALLY, --- ALL POLITICIANS ARE CORRUPT ! ! ! ! ! ! !
YOU state, WITHOUT DOUBT, --- THE ENTIRE BODY POLITIC IS FOR SALE ! ! ! ! ! !
You certainly can't prove this, you simple state it as FACT.
What I would like people to DO---- is ANYTHING besides mere whining.
YOU said before, "jJack you assume I am doing nothing to correct the "problem."
Okay, WHAT ARE YOU DOING ???? Other than whining on gater I mean.
what kind of person actually discourages people from speaking in favor of looking closely at what candidates and representatives have been up to?
That isn't what's being done here Johnny boy--- what is being done here is, you've already had your "close look," and have concluded THE WHOLE SYSTEM IS CORRUPT ! ! ! ! !
I haven't spoken out against oversight, in fact I'm all for it, and the system itself has built in safeguards for oversight, and they work.
I know there are SOME politicians that are what you say they are, BIG DEAL. Mario here isn't saying "some" politicians, he's stating ALL POLITICIANS.
That's just plain stupid.
Rick Beyer, of course is CORRECT, which is all I've said in this thread. YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE CHANGES YOURSELF if you think "problems" exist. YOU have to do it by crearting grassroots efforts and enlisting the strength and good will of MILLIONS OF OTHER US CITIZENS.
You aren't going to get that done by simple whining, particularly when the whining is STUPID, as it is when you make BLANKET STATEMENTS about ALL POLITICIANS.
If there is a "problem" it is with the heart and soul of INDIVIDUAL citizens, and not the politicians we FREELY ELECT ! ! ! ! ! ! !
WE are the government, and when you blame the politicians for your own lack of understanding and action, you make yourself the fool.
The types of politicians we have today have existed from the beginning of man - that hasn't changed. What's changed in this generation are our communications network and the nature of news organizations. In the old days, careers were destroyed over months and years - so a person had to be consistently corrupt before things caught up with them. Today, careers are destroyed in seconds - so even the most innocent comments are twisted, distorted and relentlessly covered by a hyperventilating media – until they send even the best politicians into a tailspin.
You didn't ??? Well, YES YOU DID---- or what else am I to gather from your OPENING PARAGRAPH ???
American politics today is rife with corruption and mediocrity. We live in a society so obsessed with uncovering scandals and adhering to political correctness that only the naïvely optimistic, the mediocre, the hypocrite, the criminal, or the totally clueless ever dare to poke their heads above the relative safety of the crowd and attempt to distinguish themselves in political office. The rest of the people are too smart – or too fearful – to risk humiliation at best – and the utter destruction of their lives and careers at worse.
ONLY--- THE REST---- if you don't state it OUTRIGHT you most certainly are attempting to IMPLY "all politicians."
You do not find men and women of vision, personal courage and unwavering conviction.
No where ???? well that once again implies ALL POLITICIANS doesn't it ???
Instead you discover seasoned professionals with public speaking coaches and image consultants; researchers and advisors to help them craft their positions on every issue; PR mavens to craft their public images; hairstylists to comb their hair and wardrobe consultants to select their clothes; and scores of other support staff that would make the massive posses of the most ego-centric celebrities green with envy.
Ah, but here is what YOU DO FIND eh ???? once again, you imply ALL POLITICIANS ! !
Blame it on the media.
All media ???? you condemn them with the same broad brush you use on the politicians
I think you'd better take a better look at what you say, and what you mean, before you deny what you've said, and what you mean when you say it.
They're not necessarily corrupt,
They aren't ???? then why does your article state UNEQUIVOCALLY
only the naïvely optimistic, the mediocre, the hypocrite, the criminal, or the totally clueless ever dare to poke their heads above the relative safety of the crowd and attempt to distinguish themselves in political office. The rest of the people are too smart –