Partisan warriors may love our polarized political culture. Everyone else is turned off, and tuning out.
Comment: Compulsory attendance at a polling station, with an option to indicate "none of the candidates, " would do a great deal to improve the U.S. participation in the national election. Failure to participate should be punished by a fine. I know that our libertarian brothers and sisters will scream, but we should ask them for a better, more efficient way to improve voter participation in our country.
Comment: Yeah, I would like to respond to the lazy journalism that accompanied Mr, Thomas' article as well as those who are trying to tear down Lou Dobbs because they don't want anyone to have heroes. Contrary to Mr. Thomas' statement, people like me are nowhere near the divided individuals that he makes us out to be, but we do have disagreements here and there. It's just that mere disagreements don't really boost ratings or sell publications. There is a lot of lazy and smarmy journalism in this type of magazine (I don't usually read it, except that my aunt and uncle had a copy of it and I do feel the need to respond). Right now, we have what Lee Iacocca describes in his recent book as a "conqueror's mentality", where Americans tend to lose all sorts of humility because they won something here and there, and become lazy and/or mean-spirited in their criticism and give tired lectures to others. The majority of people like me are moderates and independents, not those who tune in to these various talk shows and tend to have fringier viewpoints. I resent this notion that all people like me do is watch "Girls Gone Wild" or play XBOX all day. That's a blatant misrepresentation of us and limits our options. We may not be protesting in the streets or flaggelate at the top of our lungs, but we are active politically (especially Gen-X'ers like myself who are dismissed as mere slackers. We're not. We just happen to be low-key).
Comment: Good article; however, there are a couple missing pieces to this article. One is the apparent lack of knowledge of how our American government works by a good portion of our electorate - young and old alike. The second is the Lou Dobbs effect. They go hand in hand. Lou Dobbs of CNN calls the the whole Congress but especially the Democrats ineffective after the American public chased the conservatives/near-reactionaries from control of both houses of Congress. Now every time some consensus is achieve in Congress now dominated by Democrates who are not all liberal, our darkly conservative President vetoes decent legislation. So certainly Mr. Thomas's evaluation is descriptive of how things are, but things are not as bleak as they seem. I think we will have a good turnout for this upcoming election.
Comment: Division is a good thing - it creates clear choices. Disinterest is, in its own way, also good. Disinterested people should not participate. If they can't be bothered to make an informed choice, then the choice they make can only be a wrong one.
Comment: Division is good - it creates clear choices. Disinterest is, in its own way, also a good thing. People should choose for themselves whether to participate. Disinterested people should not vote - if they don't want to make the effort to find out what they are voting for, the rest of the people shouldn't have to pay the consequences of their lack of interest.
Comment: What took you so long to write this column.? This subject was long overdue.
M L " Mike " Waller
Comment: Its easy and fair to institute a Draft for 2%, chosen randomly from all 21 year olds male and female,no exceptions/deferments for two year service. The drafted could have the choise of a public service ( CCC type for infastructure etc ) and Military service. A lucrative after service education,benifit,reward and industry level pay for the Military and 'CCC type' carreer minded would make this even fairer. I believe that this would help bring back a focus on many US and global relations issues that go ignored like this article suggests
Comment: Its easy and fair to institute a Draft for 2%, chosen randomly from all 21 year olds male and female,no exceptions/deferments for two year service. The drafted could have the choise of a public service ( CCC type for infastructure etc ) and Military service. A lucrative after service education,benifit,reward and industry level pay for the Military and 'CCC type' carreer minded would make this even fairer. I believe that this would help bring back a focus on many US and global relations issues that go ignored like this article suggests
Comment: Given the choice between the so-called moderates of Joe Lieberman or partisanship, at this point in history, I???ll take partisanship. If moderates don???t like it and refuse to vote, I say, boo-freaken-hoo. It???s the so-called moderate that voted for Bush, not once, but twice, because he was ???the kind of guy you could have a beer with?????? (huh?) If that???s the kind of judgment we can expect from those who vote for their leadership, they can stay home!!!!!!!
Also, I find it interesting that articles like this always seem to be a plea from the Reich for liberals to stop fighting so hard, a ???leave Brittney alone??? squealing-like-a-pig plea, because they know they???re going to have their asses handed to them.
???Have compassion for the poor-poor rabid right, they know not what they do!???
B*llSh*t!!!
The right set the stage when Grover Norquist said, ???Bi-partisanship is akin to date-rape.??? It wasn???t true when he said it, but it is today. For the Reich to *** about it now does nothing except give me warm tingles.
And, for those so-called moderates who I blame most for the mess we???re in, either take an interest in your country, or stay home. No one needs the least informed making decisions for the rest of us. Bush has proven that it???s neither a virtue, nor patriotic, it???s just stupid.
Comment: The long arc that governs command and control institutions marks a decline with the dismissal of a challenge to the status quo as a small act of chaotic origin and surreptitious ambitions; as the challenge becomes worthy it leads to hand wringing and internal debate, the institution exposes its inner vulnerabilities and begin its slow and inexorable demise. Replaced in time by a greater, more prolific institution. I need not repeat middle school history lessons here but it seems that Mr. Thomas' woeful yearning for the days of centralized political media with its sensible and hypereducated gatekeepers (oh wait, Mr. Thomas is a proud heir to their traditions) is both retrospective and entirely short of any prescription of what to do with the future we actually face. The democratization of any institution is chaotic and prone to violent motions that offend the sensibilities of the guardians of the established order. But inevitably it works. The narrowcasting phenomenon so succinctly dismissed by the author and his experts has mortally wounded the traditional publishing industry, will very soon do the same to the traditional broadcasting industry (and all traditional media for that matter) and has now set its sites on the realm of politics. The political systems of today will within two or three decades be subsumed by a more flexible and responsive method of governing. Elected representatives will become that, nothing more than grocery clerks executing the orders of the constituents. Politics are like news, ultimately its all local. So unedited, unsynthesized, unobjectified information is disseminated to the people, they will decide, not "their leadership" chosen once every four years based on some hazy conceptual platform. Less issues will be sent to the House to be debated endlessly but crafted in silence by zealous staffers who more interest in how to get summer houses in Nantucket than the substance of that bill they are drafting. Policy debate will not be left to the talking heads and their barking dogs on the Sunday cable shows, or to the erudite journals and their genteel (and not so genteel) sponsors.
It will be a robust breath of fresh air when America realizes it does not need to outsource its governance. So this is not about the moderates standing up and making their voice heard, its about accelerating plurality, embracing everyone no matter how fringe who wants their voice to be heard, making more information available, faster, more reliably and more accessible, upending the system and making it more chaotic and messy and possibly more productive. Otherwise our grandchildren will be adding the US example to their own middle school history lessons. Sorry Mr. Thomas, I know that you want us to all pipe down and let you and your anointed brethren tell us what is the right and reasonable thing to do. We do not wish you any ill feelings; I think you are a voice that is both wise and judicious. But yesterday was yesterday.
Comment: The long arc that governs command and control institutions marks a decline with the dismissal of a challenge to the status quo as a small act of chaotic origin and surreptitious ambitions; as the challenge becomes worthy it leads to hand wringing and internal debate, the institution exposes its inner vulnerabilities and begin its slow and inexorable demise. Replaced in time by a greater, more prolific institution. I need not repeat middle school history lessons here but it seems that Mr. Thomas' woeful yearning for the days of centralized political media with its sensible and hypereducated gatekeepers (oh wait, Mr. Thomas is a proud heir to their traditions) is both retrospective and entirely short of any prescription of what to do with the future we actually face. The democratization of any institution is chaotic and prone to violent motions that offend the sensibilities of the guardians of the established order. But inevitably it works. The narrowcasting phenomenon so succinctly dismissed by the author and his experts has mortally wounded the traditional publishing industry, will very soon do the same to the traditional broadcasting industry (and all traditional media for that matter) and has now set its sites on the realm of politics. The political systems of today will within two or three decades be subsumed by a more flexible and responsive method of governing. Elected representatives will become that, nothing more than grocery clerks executing the orders of the constituents. Politics are like news, ultimately its all local. So unedited, unsynthesized, unobjectified information is disseminated to the people, they will decide, not "their leadership" chosen once every four years based on some hazy conceptual platform. Less issues will be sent to the House to be debated endlessly but crafted in silence by zealous staffers who more interest in how to get summer houses in Nantucket than the substance of that bill they are drafting. Policy debate will not be left to the talking heads and their barking dogs on the Sunday cable shows, or to the erudite journals and their genteel (and not so genteel) sponsors.
It will be a robust breath of fresh air when America realizes it does not need to outsource its governance. So this is not about the moderates standing up and making their voice heard, its about accelerating plurality, embracing everyone no matter how fringe who wants their voice to be heard, making more information available, faster, more reliably and more accessible, upending the system and making it more chaotic and messy and possibly more productive. Otherwise our grandchildren will be adding the US example to their own middle school history lessons. Sorry Mr. Thomas, I know that you want us to all pipe down and let you and your anointed brethren tell us what is the right and reasonable thing to do. We do not wish you any ill feelings; I think you are a voice that is both wise and judicious. But yesterday was yesterday.
Comment: Just more (refutable) CW, illustrating the imperial city cocktail party mentality which passes for a political press in this country.
Comment: Just more (refutable) CW, illustrating the imperial city cocktail party mentality which passes for a political press in this country.
Comment: I think you're dead on, and this is essentially why I support Barack Obama.
He made the same argument you're making here in The Audacity Of Hope- that while politicians and the media get wrapped up in their own petty arguments and analysis, most Americans are busy not paying attention and trying to make ends meet. He also makes the argument that, as Americans, we agree about a lot more than we don't, but conflict plays better in the news and on the stump, and that this truth is central to his governing philosophy.
He also made another argument- that the vacuum of power created by so much political apathy is to blame for the control special interest groups have over politics, and that changing the tone and getting regular people more engaged in their Democracy might fix this.
In a primary that will be dominated by fierce partisans, this message hasn't played well. It's been spun by everyone and turned into "Obama says he'll beat those evil, bloodsucking Republicans by playing nice, but WE KNOW WE HAVE TO KILL THEM WITH KNIVES TO SAVE AMERICA!"
I suspect this is why so many Republicans and Independents (self included) support him, and I believe that should he manage to get this message across in a compelling way, he will be our next president.
Comment: Utter nonsense, Mr. Thomas. Voting rates stank in the late '80s, well before Limbaugh and his ilk started poisoning the well, and before those terrible blogs. And i love your tsake on that "big tent" the Democrats had in the sainted old days. Roomy renough for Sen. Eastland and his talk of 'unbearably stinking Negroes," and all. Those were the days. You Beltway navel-gazers kill me. I realize people who care about what's happening to our country would simply ruin the chit-chat at your dinner parties, but too freaking bad. Say hello to Broder for me.
Comment: We likes to be stupid. We like to know how we FEEL, and how everyone FEELS. We don't like egg-heads - they make our head hurt, what with all their statistics, facts, nuance, and such like. Just like Dub-a, Amur'ca does not like too think to much an-e-MOR.
Bread and F-ing circuses (and exported war), Baby!! Rome probably was not demolished in a day, either.
Comment: According to Mr. Thomas, he is turned off by "hyper-partisanship." I understand. It's all my fault and the fault of people like me who care too much. If only we could be calm, relaxed and understand that nothing serious is going on here, things would be nice. Everyone would be happy. The turned off would feel comfortable and participate once again. We are at a loss to know what these calm gradually once again tuned in would want to vote about anyway but it would be a good thing.
Being the thwarted and twisted soul I am, I get deeply concerned that our liberties are being torn away. That makes me emotional and a devastating turn off to the moderates who would get out there and participate if it weren't for me. The ugly person that I am is concerned that our government through its mismanagement may have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands in an unnecessary war. But that's no reason for me to become politically involved and to get upset. After all God grows new people all the time. And didn't Scrooge reflect on the importance of limiting the surplus population anyway? I could mention the economy and the sub prime melt down but I've been annoying enough.
Strangely enough, I am a student of history and I can't seem to find any place in history where there moderate middle ever got anything started. The American Revolution, abolition, women's rights, civil rights, ending the Vietnam War, etc. This always seemed to be the result of committed idealogues who kept turning off all the regular guys who just pretty much can't put up with us.
You know I bet that there are writers for major news magazines, and I bet with their inside knowledge of what's going on, they are really upset by what's going on in this country today. I bet they glory in their role as defenders of the American experiment in democracy and human rights. I bet they are ready to fight as crusading journalist have always fought - for the little guy. Oh but no! It appears they have found real wisdom in encouraging us to be calm. Thanks! I realize how wrong I was to believe that you belt way media types had no concern for the common good. Obviously your deep concern for my welfare and that of my country led you to try to make me stay away from activism. After all, it's just a nation and a people and shared responsibility in brotherhood. What's to get concerned about? Once again I thank you for your idealism and hard work.
Comment: Thomas quotes Cass Sunstein. Readers might like this quote from Cass Sunstein. Sunstein is discussing the Supreme Court but really you could apply it to our political climat in general:
"...[W]hat was once on the extreme right is now merely conservative. What was once conservative is now centrist. What was centrist is now left wing. What was once on the left no longer exists. The political right has had a strong interest in downplaying these changes. "
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_myth_of_the_balanced_court
Comment: The "Bipartisanship" that Evans means, is giving Republicans a change to catch their breath before the next big push to the right. Considering how far we've already gone in that direction, this would be like calling time out -- on our own ten yard line.
Comment: No one seemed to be bothered by "partisonship" when right wing radio took off in the 80's or Fox News went on the air in the mid '90s. It seems the MSM only started complaining about the "p" word with the recent growth of the progressive movement on the Internet and on talk radio. Now people like Thomas see something sinister. You don't need to be a genius to figure out what is going on.
Comment: Evan, how does your high Broderism explain away the fact that as partisanship has risen since the '80s, actual voter participation has risen, not fallen?
See Markos Moulitsas' excellent analysis of recent history for the details:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/27/95010/179/336/426798
Then come back and apologize for ignoring that history.
Comment: It doesn't take a genius, just an honest reporter, to actually look at the real numbers and analyze them. See Mr. Thomas, it looks like this:
http://kos.dailykos.com/
Comment: For Washington media hacks like Evan Thomas "bipartisanship" means progressive Democrats cave on every issue. You never hear a peep out of them when Republicans are starting disastrous wars and ramming through a far right agenda.
Comment: Vote? You are joking right! Gather Lawyers, Guns and Money, or you are doomed!
Until significant numbers of our elected officials are jailed for corruption, your vote shall stay as irrelevant as it has been!
Comment: Hillary Clinton voting for the war, and a blank check for the war is against everything she stands for, unfortunately there are forces that control individuals in Washinton that is beyond our realm. Inotherwords if a politician is in trouble they will go against their own principles just to save themselves. This is why I say Hillary should be appointed to a health and childrens welfare committee under an Obama presidency. That way she will not be susceptible to scandal. The Clintons have shown time and time again that they are too political. Their decisions are based on what's best for them first and the people second. Hillary Clinton laughs at the fact that there are individuals who can tell her what kind of president to be. If going negative assists her she will do it, if going family helps her she will do it. These individuals in Washington have been programed to adhere to the will of special interst lobbyists. Why do you think we fund Israeli security forces. The politician is guided by their own narrow interests. This the conclusion I have come too over the holidays. The democrats that have been in the Senate and in the Congress for the last 6 years and have done nothing on a national scale. Edwards has done nothing as a Senator, his voting record indicates he has gone along with whatever the mainstream has wanted him to do, Clinton has done what ever the mainstream has wanted her to do, and pelosi has been playing games and is getting schooled everyday. I have no choice but to vote for OBAMA, what other hope is exist. We need someone who is not programmed and that can bring unity. Obama has not flip floped, he has run a steady and unified campaign even when he was down in the polls, his campaign has stayed focused and positive. Clinton went from negative, to bashing, to family . What is going it is like a script has been written everyday and Hillary is just the actor reading the lines. Like I said there are those that think they are far more experienced and knowledgable than us, but when you look at their individual record it is as if they never had experience. We are stupid and this is why our candidates act stupid. Remember our candidates are a reflection of our society, do what you half to do to get ahead even if it means going against your principles. Experience.
Comment: You do not control the Government the Government controls you, and this has to change. We are not talking race we are talking constitution. The Government is cleverly taking over our civil liberties, slowly, intelligently. Keeping us dumb. Romney is playing the same card Bush did. There stupid so do not play smart.
Comment: Right On with this article. As one in the middle, I am tired of the attempts to classify me. Even one of my oldest friends, who still lives where we grew up, considers me as gone astray, while he fortifies himself against the opposite pole's propaganda by assidously reading - and forwarding - the blogs and orgs. that support his side. The question is: how can we combat this? In this day of information overload, would-be experts, whose agenda is to 1.) get published or perish; and 2.) continue to get published, force the polarization perception. Polls, both statistically legitimate and the ones stuck in the corners of various websites (you know the ones I mean) force a this or that decision. There is no option for "throw the whole bunch out and get me somebody who can help". Regarding your closing sentence - I do go out and vote, but for whom, and how? The votes I cast are immediately interpreted as "one or the other", I don't get a line item veto on the platforms of the candidates for whom I vote. I'm not red or blue. I am a color in the middle.
Comment: This article describes perfectly how I feel. 20% of the population exists on the fringes of the left and right, whilst the other 80% of us mow our lawns, pay our taxes and generally try and lead good lives. We are not involved in politics and sometimes forget to vote because the 20% on the fringes control the two political parties. Our current method of primary elections, fund raising and the like prevent moderate candidates, the likes of which I would support, from making it to the general election, thus I could care less about the candidates that do.
Comment: Wow, because I'm a progressive partisan I don't mow my lawn, pay taxes or try to lead a good life? How insulting of you! I'm just as normal and middle class as you, but clearly I care quite a bit more about the future of our country and the planet than you do.
If this is what moderates and centrists are like--narrow-minded sheep--then I'm even more proud to be on the "left fringe".
Gotta go shovel the driveway then drive the kids to school.
Comment: This article describes perfectly how I feel. 20% of the population exists on the fringes of the left and right, whilst the other 80% of us mow our lawns, pay our taxes and generally try and lead good lives. We are not involved in politics and sometimes forget to vote because the 20% on the fringes control the two political parties. Our current method of primary elections, fund raising and the like prevent moderate candidates, the likes of which I would support, from making it to the general election, thus I could care less about the candidates that do.
Comment:
.
Each person has the most power within one's own community. Voting for some government person is a cop out for developing our own community of dialog, debate, discusion, FUN, chatting. Right now we are all so separated from each other that we do not have a clue what is happening anywhere. The power of money and the indoctrination happening in our schools leaves us feeling clueless and helpless.
Read John Taylor Gatto's book DUMBING US DOWN, and his website.
Necessary to change anything is a change in the basic way we live. We need to have
"People" engaged and empowered in an enriched environment
"SOCIAL CAPITAL" "HUMAN ENERGY"
We are not a democracy. Our people are very separated.
Money /capital and people involvement are basic to any problem.
I ask that you give some attention to two theories that I advocate for:
1. We need to develop more ???social capital???, about the environment we are in,
person to person sharing, cooperating, mentoring, supporting, etc.
We do not have this, because we have lost much of the family small group support,
and we do not have PLACES where we can meet, play, interact, discuss, etc.
- school buildings, churches, social enters, etc.
I have mostly the bars to go to if I wish to go out at a non pre-arranged time.
2. We need to restructure k-12 education
to give ???credit for education??? rather than ???credit for time???
i.e. 180 days = 2nd grade, 3rd grade, etc. ad nauseum.
The expense of giving credit for only!!! what happens in a school building is
antique, expensive, frustrating, alienating, etc.
Our schools and churches train / indoctrinate for an authoritarian system,
and then we wonder why we have non-acting citizens.
I believe that attention to these extra resources of money and time, can enhance your efforts!!
I will offer my time freely to elaborate on these.
I have an old book draft at www.chieffinc.org
Being older, a homemaker, depressed, etc. I find it very difficult to have a voice in our culture.
I am asking for help.
Yours truly,
Janet Van Asten jan@intsol.net 920-734-0376 cell 920-850-6530
1035 S. Kernan Ave. Appleton, WI. 54915
Comment: QQ more losers
Comment: Some of you have gotten way off the point. Mr. Evans is trying to point out that political discourse has either cemented public thought or turned it off where voting is concerned.
I contend that people (those who care) are becoming more informed, depending on where (or if) they search. It looks to me like Mr. Evans does not like that. I do not think he likes the fact that one can look at DRUDGE and pick any number of publications and/or writers and get a plethora of opinion from both sides of an issue. I do not think he likes all the cable news channels where issues can be gone into in depth and actually interview experts who perhaps disagree. That is healthy and gives us the opportunity to think for ourselves. I also find it interesting that quite often Real Clear Politics will put up two articles that come from opposite points of view on the same page; quite stimulating and thought-provoking. It is all there if you bother to look. If you look at both sides, at least you will have the benefit of counterpoint and can then draw your own conclusion. No doubt you will agree with one point of view more than the other. As for the folks who do not bother to look at the news channels or read publications: I do not want them voting!!!! With no information, they are like cattle being driven in a certain direction, not really knowing where they are going or what to do when they get there. (I think that happened in Florida and it did not work well: pandemonium!) And, as I ended my first comment: do not despair. Some of us are still paying attention. We can go the distance. Dropping out and not listening or reading for a while helps. You can jump back in and catch up easily and perhaps get fresh perspective. Just stay informed as best you can and GO VOTE!
Comment: The lack of Statesmanship is what is missing in today's political scene. There is nothing wrong with pointing out in a vigorous manner that your opponent in a campaign is WRONG but that is a far cry from the demonization policy of every political campaign going on in 2007. I want the candidate who gets my vote to state that his/her opponent is wrong but do it with tact, style, and substance and recognize that in winning the campaign they will govern those who they villify and stop it.
Comment: Yes, there have been arguments but Aaron Burr could never hve contributed to the Constitution as Hamilton did. One must read the Federalist Papers to appreciate what was accomplished. Read Madison @10 or Hamilton's #21 to see how they treated Factions in the C;onstitution by its design. One dismissel the problem by partisianship rather than FACTIONS. John Locke and David Hume weere liberally spread through the Constitution and not to know them is not to know the founders. We could not construct the Constitution today, we have neither the ability, nor the experience. When dthe governments design is hodge-podged by ignorant leadeers and ill informed Congress and Courts. I doubt there is a person in congress or government that has read Locke and his Essay Conceerning Human Understanding that will explain why it is not partisianship but factions--watch your words my man.
Comment: This is not unknown, Madison in Federalist paper #10 discussed FACTIONS at great length and the need to structure a system to control them, whether political, religious, racial, etc. When congress enabled the administration to decide invasions, etc. its essence was betrayed and of course, there are many other examples. A reading of the Federalist Papers will reveal many concerns for this, including Hamiltons Paper #21.. When Senator Kyl leads the republican Party in Congress and bush had his Rove, what can one expect?
Comment: Freedom is a paradox: freedom in desire and freedom in mind. When you choose the freedom in desire, you will also gain the griefs in mind. Else you select the freedom in mind, you should curb your unreasonable desires, and to be responsible for others and yourself.
Comment: you are on the outskirts of the problem butgood thought. It is not new. Eve desired the apple and knowledge, one cannot have knowledge without desire but desire is available without knowledge. Other elements such as imagination and creativity do not make them wholesome but they might. In my mind a great aamount of the difficulty is the lack of a philosophical search, lawyers, doctors and a greatmany others are technicians but they exeert great influence in their practices as if dthey created law or medicine. Unfortunately, such is not the case and information is in a bit of shambles. Lots of it but with little effect on knowledge but a great instigator of emotion. Freedom has many dimensions and as much detrimental as beneficial. NOTHING is known that has not been experienced. Consider what life would be like if that weere not the case.
Comment: Freedom is a paradox: freedom in desire and freedom in mind. When you choose the freedom in desire, you will also gain the griefs in mind. Else you select the freedom in mind, you should curb your unreasonable desires, and to be responsible for others and yourself.
Comment: Posted by: JonathanSc1
I believe the American public in general are tired of the lip service that the political community offers. Our elected officials need to do the things that they campained for and do their very best to do what is right for the majority of the people. The presidential canidates need to stand behind the ideals that they speak of and to fulfill some promises that they have stated. Also, the president, congress, senate,house of representatives, judges, police, military, and border patrol need to take care of things, for example: protect our borders, deport illegal immigrants, a strong military, a strong economy, a free society to where Biblical views and values can be expressed in the home without intimidation or the elimination from the educational system or the public, to keep all our land and properties intact, and to do what is right for the common good of all citizens. God bless each legal citizen and America!
Comment: Very few people read newspapers and blogs anyway. It's teachers, preachers and parents who stuff stupid ideas down more and more ignorant kids who no longer question, think for themselves and push boundaries. America is regressing into a anti-intelligence morass who worship at the feet of improbable deities who generate fear and celebrate compliance. Just what the President ordered.
Comment: Yikes, softwarelaw has some real issues with reality (and sexuality). Too bad s/he wasn't able to stick to the topic!
Comment: Despite decreases in influence of the major media, I think newspapers still pretty much control perception of the public.
* how the media made us think we were losing the Iraq war in 2005. People who are close to Iraq knew otherwise.
* how the newspapers have been gaining acceptance of anal sodomy, equal the guise of 'equality'
Someday, we will look back and wonder did we ever let the newspapers promote such stupid ideas. But,, for now the newspapers still rule politics. Until the newspapers die, they will be the biggest influence over who is elected and who is not.
Comment: Despite decreases in influence of the major media, I think newspapers still pretty much control perception of the public.
* how the media made us think we were losing the Iraq war in 2005. People who are close to Iraq knew otherwise.
* how the newspapers have been gaining acceptance of anal sodomy, equal the guise of 'equality'
Someday, we will look back and wonder did we ever let the newspapers promote such stupid ideas. But,, for now the newspapers still rule politics. Until the newspapers die, they will be the biggest influence over who is elected and who is not.
Comment: News flash: There was no war in Iraq in 2005. Just an occupation. And if you think we can win an occupation, you have a strange idea of winning.
Comment: Even as someone fed up with the ineptness of the mainstream media, like most Americans after the Iraq WMD debacle, I'm amazed at the audacity of this article. We're told the extreme level of partisanship has nothing to do with Bush and Rove's political strategies- wholly unmentioned, nothing to do with the media's valuing bi-partisan 'compromises' over the actual facts, no not even Fox News which equates 'liberal' with traitor, it's the Internet's fault! Blogs rose to fill a need the media failed to address - choosing to report and reflect reality instead of this ridiculous notion that both sides are equally valid and a compromise is best. The only way to unite this country is to demand the common meeting place of both parties should be reality - by calling out conservative (or liberal) lies every time they occur - and having the guts to say that those who espouse them are, in fact, liars.
Comment: Even as someone fed up with the ineptness of the mainstream media, like most Americans after the Iraq WMD debacle, I'm amazed at the audacity of this article. We're told the extreme level of partisanship has nothing to do with Bush and Rove's political strategies- wholly unmentioned, nothing to do with the media's valuing bi-partisan 'compromises' over the actual facts, no not even Fox News which equates 'liberal' with traitor, it's the Internet's fault! Blogs rose to fill a need the media failed to address - choosing to report and reflect reality instead of this ridiculous notion that both sides are equally valid and a compromise is best. The only way to unite this country is to demand the common meeting place of both parties should be reality - by calling out conservative (or liberal) lies every time they occur - and having the guts to say that those who espouse them are, in fact, liars.
Comment: Maybe civic minded voters like me who once would never miss an election are just giving up. Because sometimes it doesn't seem to matter how much we weigh the issues or do due dilligence to be better informed voters, it's all out done by the hoards of voters who would rather vote for someone they'd 'Like to have a beer with' than is actually qualified to adequetly run a country.
Comment: Opening of the American Mind should be the name of the article. Mainstream media, which slants left, cannot control the groupthink in the masses no longer. Im sure the Daily Kos and Move On (not mentioned) will provide balance. Ignorant or the informed will be make the choice in 2008 - you decide which is which.. Enjoy your MTV, ESPN and XBox.
Comment: Perhaps the article should be called the "Opening of the American Mind." No reference to the Daily Kos or Move On in the article? Mainstream news, which slants left, cannot influence the whole of the country anymore with group think. Ignorant or Informed seemed to be the divisions - our country will decide in 2008 which is which. Enjoy your ESPN, Xbox and MTV.
Comment: Yes. Democracy replaces one or a few dictators with crowds of them. Communism is worse to be sure, but all government is based on force and force alone. Just because you get to vote for the group of thugs who will be brutalizing you doesn't make much difference.
Comment: It must be realized that democracy is a failed societal concept. If it worked, we would all be Greek. But it has not worked and never can work. It is a societal concept based on coercion. And is not different in principle than a dictatorship or monarchy. The only difference is that indviduals can supposedly chose those who will control their life and property.
Comment: Failed societal concept? Based on coercion? As opposed to, say, communism where the State punishes political discourse through violence and predetermines an individual's financial prospects. Democracy has its drawbacks, but it is about the least coercive politicial concept ever developed.
Comment: Anarchy is. As for communisim it is really an economic system, while democracy is a political one. We are not a demoracy, our society is a capitalist one, and we use representative democracy for our political system. Any wonder why the two don't mesh? Our represenatives are bought by the capitalists that have spare resources!
Comment: I am one of the turned-off tuned-out crowd, at least when it comes to presidential elections. Because over the years I've seen that who is in the white house doesn't really matter. No president in the past oh-so-many years has done anything that brings in substantial change in how the nation goes about its business. Partly because they don't have the vision to bring about real change, partly because they don't have the power, and mostly because as a nation we really don't know what kind of change we want at a national level. We are much better in voicing our needs at the local level. I always vote in city and state elections. I vote in presidential elections if I have nothing better to do that day. Advisors to presidential campaigns do a rigorous "market reasearch" as much as any corporate wanting to introduce a new product. The fact that campaign promises provide ill-researched or impractical solutions to what are perceived are common problems reflect the confused state of the union. No one really knows what they want. Most of us would love someone else to take care of our problems.
For me, the states are where the action is. I couldn't care less who is the president. But I want to choose my alderman and my governor.
Comment: The first thing I have to say as a political junkie is the MEDIA is actually the main VILLAIN here. The PRESS foments and encourages controversy and confrontation TO SELL THEIR PUBLICATIONS. Cannot believe you do not see that. But then you are a member of that establishment and are probably in complete denial. I take professors??? word or Quote Studies Unquote with a grain of salt. They are members of the same establishment and want to GET PUBLISHED. They have the same mentality as the MEDIA. Now considering your elevation of the middle of the 20th century as an example of cooperation, the democrats had control of Congress for 40 years. The republicans didn???t have much choice in how things were run. All they could do was to try and slow things down and they were polite about it until 1994 when they had had enough. I think they have given up lately and turned into cowards because the MEDIA is so belligerent, relentless and acidic. Stats have shown that the MEDIA votes 80% democrat, so I think that proves my point. This is not an impression. This is fact. And since Fox News came along, the MSP, or drive-by media, as they are known in some circles, have done everything they can to destroy Fox. Isn???t that interesting? The MEDIA trying to destroy one of their own kind. That also tells me something.
Political junkies can find anything on the Internet. Yes, they can and I for one look at both political sides and I would bet many folks who are really trying to learn do the same thing. I read Maureen Dowd and I read Peggy Noonan. Now there???s a study in contrasts, particularly when talking about Ms. Clinton. I read Camille Paglia what wit! and Ann Coulter also witty. I also read Mickey Kaus and Hugh Hewlett. Both writers are intelligent, provocative, but gentlemen at the same time. I skip most of the blogs as I find them to be juvenile, as a rule.
However, in spite of your conclusion, I, for one, am glad fewer folks are voting and the reason I am glad is because what I???m realizing is that the people who should vote care about the country. They are the ones who bother to read and educate themselves on the issues. I don???t want people to vote because they should. What kind of sense does that make? I???m wondering if the Founding Fathers may have had the right idea about restricting the privilege of voting to property owners since they had committed and had an actual investment in the country and wanted to protect that investment.
The redstate, bluestate division is actually a picture of those who are invested in this country and those who are not. City dwellers have little or no idea of the amount of work those in the hinter lands produce in order to keep the cities running. They just go to the store and buy (or shop-lift yes, shop-lifting is increasing) what they want and think nothing of how the product got there.
So, do not despair, America will survive close-minded or not, some of us are still paying attent
Comment: The first thing I have to say???as a political junkie???is: the MEDIA is actually the main VILLAIN here. The PRESS foments and encourages controversy and confrontation TO SELL THEIR PUBLICATIONS!!! Can???t believe you don???t see that???but then, you are a member of that establishment and are probably in complete denial. I take professors??? word or ???Studies??? with a grain of salt; they???re members of the same establishment and want to GET PUBLISHED. They have the same mentality as the MEDIA.
Now???as far as your elevation of the middle of the 20th century as an example of cooperation: the democrats had control of Congress for 40 years???the republicans didn???t have much choice in how things were run. All they could do was to try and slow things down and they were polite about it until 1994 when they???d ???had enough???. I think they???ve given up lately; they???ve turned into cowards because the PRESS is so belligerent, relentless and acidic. Stats have shown that the PRESS votes 80% democrat, so I think that proves my point. This is not an ???impression???; this is fact. And since Fox News came along, the MSP, or ???drive-by??? media as they are known in some circles, have done everything they can to destroy Fox. Isn???t that interesting? The MEDIA trying to destroy one of their own kind. That also tells me something.
???Political junkies can find anything on the Internet???: yes, they can and I for one look at both political sides and I would bet many folks who are really trying to learn do the same thing. I read Maureen Dowd and I read Peggy Noonan. (Now there???s a study in contrasts, particularly when talking about Ms. Clinton.) I read Camille Paglia (what wit!) and Ann Coulter (also witty). I also read Mickey Kaus and Hugh Hewlett: both writers are intelligent, provocative, but gentlemen at the same time. I skip most of the blogs as I find them to be juvenile, as a rule.
However, in spite of your conclusion, I, for one, am glad fewer folks are voting and the reason I am glad is because what I???m realizing is that the people who do vote care about the country. They are the ones who bother to read and educate themselves on the issues. I don???t want people to ???just vote??? because they ???should???. What kind of sense does that make? I???m wondering if the Founding Fathers may have had the right idea about restricting the privilege of voting to property owners since they had committed and had an actual investment in the country and wanted to protect that investment.
The red-state, blue-state division is actually a picture of those who are invested in this country and those who are not. City dwellers have little or no idea of the amount of work those in the hinter lands produce in order to keep the cities running. They just go to the store and buy (or shop-lift???yes, shop-lifting is increasing) what they want and think nothing of how the product got there.
So, don???t despair, America will survive?
Comment: The real problem is not partisan discourse, as the author suggests, but the bland homogeneity that has settled over our nation. It has been on the rise since the ???50s, when a government monopoly on education gave us massive schools and a standardized curriculum that emphasizes trivialities. The partisans on both sides are not the cause of the lamentable state of public discourse. For all their opinion-mongering, they are at least calling on us to wake from our sleep and take on the issues of the day. The Big Three networks, about whom the author is so nostalgic, helped to lull us to sleep, squeezing out true diversity of opinion while giving us the false sensation that they were ???objective.??? And what of the author???s affinity for the Big Tents of the two political parties of decades ago? People used to complain that there was simply no difference between them. No, what we need are not two polite parties (look where that brought us!) but a greater variety of parties. Until we get over our misguided reverence for the two-party system we will get nowhere. Let a passionate diversity of opinion reign. As our Founding Fathers found, it will lead us toward common values, not away from them. And none of this can happen under the megalithic rule of a monopoly over our children???s education. It is anathema to true Jeffersonian discourse.
Comment: It would be a big step forward if the larger media outlets would actually attack hyper-partisanship and stop feeding it. A bi-partisan group of principled political leaders need to rein in both parties by threatening to brand the worst partisans of both parties with a Scarlet 'P' if they don't stop this nonsense. I think one of the greatest political reforms would be to require any presidential candidate to be ouf of any political office for 4 years before they could run for office.
I
Comment: Until being a partisan political junkie is classifed as a dysfunctional addiction, I don't see much hope of increasing voter turnout. The average person thinks the leadership of both parties are nuts, and don't want either one in power. If the media would attack hyper-partisanship instead of feeding it, that would be a big step forward.
Comment: I think tha the partisanship is so strong because the stakes are so high. Depending up who is elected President the Supreme Court, for instance, can change philosopy and rights that once existed can evaporate be that Roe vs Wade or the 2nd Ammendment gun rights.
These are not seen by "particants" as small things. Until elections don't mean anything there are going to be rough times.
Comment: Sorry, but the author completely ignores the role played by the shift in values and morality in America and the mainstreaming of ant-Americanism. It was possible for politics to be more moderate when the vast majority of Americans (including what we now call the "elites") shared the same values, lived by the same code of morality, and believed that, on balance, America was a force for good in the world. When those shared beliefs and values began to erode, so did the ability for moderation in politics to dominate. There is no shared vision of America and of what Americans should look and live and be like anymore. Perhaps talk radio and the internet have contributed to making the divide larger or more noticeable, but the divide has been growing since Vietnam (in which the media was NOT neutral) and the sexual revolution and the Great Society and Roe v. Wade.
Comment: The author seems to forget that it wasn't so long ago that the big complaint was that there was no clear choice between the two parties. Their respective tents had grown so large that they simply overlapped. The problem is not that the tents are far apart or that the discussion is so acrimonious, but rather that no other tents have been able to arise. As long as we are held in a misguided reverence for the two-party system--held in place by a system of special interest lobbyists and "I'll trade your earmark for my earmark"--we will never draw more people into the public discourse. We need a wider variety of passionate people advocating important causes. But I doubt it will happen until we challenge the notion of a monopolistic government school system. This is where the lack of interest in true debate begins. True diversity in ways of educating children will lead to an engaged, involved citizenry. And only through that will the truly American values re-emerge. The Founders of our nation were not a homogeneous bunch. Their lack of a "common education" and "the three news networks" didn't prevent them from discovering common values. Let a passionate diversity of opinion reign. Only through such discourse will our faith in the American vision re-arise.
Comment: Sorry, but the author completely ignores the role played by the shift in values and morality in America and the mainstreaming of ant-Americanism. It was possible for politics to be more moderate when the vast majority of Americans (including what we sometimes call the "elites") shared the same values, lived by the same code of morality, and believed that, on balance, America was a force for good in the world. When those shared beliefs and values began to erode, so did the ability for moderation in politics to dominate. There is no shared vision of America and of what Americans should look and live and be like anymore. Perhaps talk radio and the internet have contributed to making the divide larger or more noticeable, but the divide has been growing since Vietnam (in which the media was not neutral, as the author would undoubtedly have us think) and the sexual revolution and the Great Society and Roe v. Wade.
Comment: Ecomaven: I wholeheartedly agree with your point on political segregation. I grew up in Jewish Los Angeles, knowing only liberals. I moved to Texas, meeting a wide range of conservatives. My family in L.A. seemingly can't quite grasp the mindset of the conservatives out here; at some level they just have no experience with an entire segment of the population that comes from vastly different beliefs. Hard to create compromise when each "side" believes that the other must be, in some respects, joking.
Comment: An excellent and insightful piece. Interested readers should check out Ronald Brownstein's book "The Second Civil War" that discusses hyperpartisanship. One other point to note is that the expansion of 24 hr news and the Internet, not to mention some contributing social factors, encourage the horse-race aspect of politics. Politicians get good press for "beating" the other guy (or gal). The sober realities of policy discussion and compromise have long given way (at least for many Americans) to the snippets and zingers of competitive politics.
Comment: An excellent and insightful piece. Interested readers should check out Ronald Brownstein's book "The Second Civil War" that discusses hyperpartisanship. One other point to note is that the expansion of 24 hr news and the Internet, not to mention some contributing social factors, encourage the horse-race aspect of politics. Politicians get good press for "beating" the other guy (or gal). The sober realities of policy discussion and compromise have long given way (at least for many Americans) to the snippets and zingers of competitive politics.
Comment: Comment: You got it right. Unfortunately the divisions that you speak of are much greater. Segragation by political view is geographic/social reality as well as in narrow casted media enclaves. All too many left wing Democrats don't know a single Republican and vice versa. Simply put we breaking down into tribes on the extremes and if the middle doesn't rise up in revolt, we will be in big trouble!!
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
PROJECT GREEN Young pollution sleuths and community activists fight for healthier air.
Sponsored by
|
Loading Menu
