Are we viewing Obama through rose tinted glasses?

[shady28]

I don't think we've seen bipartisanship since the days of LBJ and Great Society and Civil Rights but then again we haven't seen total gridlock that the Senate won't even vote on nominees. I thought if you didn't like someone, you just voted no but not bringing them to a vote has got to be unconstitutional.

Will the gridlock get worse after Obama leaves office? It may very well turn out these days under Obama were the good old days and we'll hunger for these again. I say that because I know how bad Bush was and the Republican partisanship has shown the democrats how to be evil when in control and get away with it.

You guys are not paying attention if you think the left or the right represents you.

This happens - no matter what party is in control of Congress or the White House.

http://billmoyers.com/2014/08/14/a-...ield-political-influence-the-rest-of-us-dont/

The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a “non-significant, near-zero level.” The analysts further discovered that rich individuals and business-dominated interest groups dominate the policymaking process. The mass-based interest groups had minimal influence compared to the business-based interest groups.

This really is not a left or a right thing, even though I'm sure people will try to make it out that way. It's a representation thing.

Our politicians and their supporting political advisers / policy makers are some of the best propagandists, liars, and manipulators to walk the earth. They have armies of people now who make a career out of this.


It's the best argument for going anti-establishment, people like Trump Sanders and Carson. Of those, only Sanders wants to directly address the issues of campaign finance reform and the influence of lobbyists.

Which is why, regardless of the so-called "issues" (which is a fools errand, there are no issues other than manufactured ones for your consumption) I think people should vote against the establishment. Sanders vs Cruz or Bush? Sanders. Hillary vs Trump? Trump. etc.

But I have serious doubts if we will be given a non establishment alternative, on either side.

 

[Jhhnn]

You guys are not paying attention if you think the left or the right represents you.

This happens - no matter what party is in control of Congress or the White House.

http://billmoyers.com/2014/08/14/a-...ield-political-influence-the-rest-of-us-dont/




This really is not a left or a right thing, even though I'm sure people will try to make it out that way. It's a representation thing.

Our politicians and their supporting political advisers / policy makers are some of the best propagandists, liars, and manipulators to walk the earth. They have armies of people now who make a career out of this.


It's the best argument for going anti-establishment, people like Trump Sanders and Carson. Of those, only Sanders wants to directly address the issues of campaign finance reform and the influence of lobbyists.

Which is why, regardless of the so-called "issues" (which is a fools errand, there are no issues other than manufactured ones for your consumption) I think people should vote against the establishment. Sanders vs Cruz or Bush? Sanders. Hillary vs Trump? Trump. etc.

But I have serious doubts if we will be given a non establishment alternative, on either side.

Please. Trump & Carson are very much members of the establishment elite. Notions to the contrary are foolish, particularly wrt Trump-

Just because he tells you what you want to hear doesn't mean he's not a charlatan. Quite the contrary.

 

[TheSlamma]

I don't think we've seen bipartisanship since the days of LBJ and Great Society and Civil Rights but then again we haven't seen total gridlock that the Senate won't even vote on nominees. I thought if you didn't like someone, you just voted no but not bringing them to a vote has got to be unconstitutional.

Will the gridlock get worse after Obama leaves office? It may very well turn out these days under Obama were the good old days and we'll hunger for these again. I say that because I know how bad Bush was and the Republican partisanship has shown the democrats how to be evil when in control and get away with it.

Sadly, I think the gridlock will just continue and probably just get worse. I feel like over the last 16 years in so many aspects of life we are just seeing extremism becoming a bigger problem than it has been in a really long time. The way people believe in things that are not true or even the way they deny things that are blatantly true. To me extremism is one of the most powerful forces for being self destructive.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Sadly, I think the gridlock will just continue and probably just get worse. I feel like over the last 16 years in so many aspects of life we are just seeing extremism becoming a bigger problem than it has been in a really long time. The way people believe in things that are not true or even the way they deny things that are blatantly true. To me extremism is one of the most powerful forces for being self destructive.

And there are various ways of looking at that and analyzing it.

There are two views of change usually discussed in your Poli-Sci classes, just as you might touch on the "expanded role" and "small" role philosophies of government. There is "utopianism," and "incrementalism."

Your extremist phenomenon is almost always, exclusively utopian. Whether the view is progressive or reactionary, it is utopian for advocating massive change in short periods of time.

I think there's another post highlighting a recent interview with Robert Reich, who sees Obama as an incrementalist. But that's nothing of news: most traditional, rational politicians fall into that category. Utopians seldom, if ever, get elected.

So, for instance, when you hear a politician call for elimination of the EPA, and you remember what it was like during the late '60s when you could literally taste smog in the air which is now much cleaner than it once was, or when you see cases where various types of pollution spill over from one state to the next, you recoil from these ideas -- which you might say are pretty nutty.

 

[IGBT]

he's far from the wizard of smart. that's why he has a firewall of willing accomplices in the media and elsewhere to assure he survives.