|
|
Post by moritz on Oct 31, 2010 12:39:50 GMT -8
I know that Americans have a history of shooting politicians they don't like, still I'm wondering if the political climate in the USA has ever been this loaded with hate, defamation, aggression and - sometimes more, sometimes less subtle yet obviously deliberate falsehood? From "Taliban Dan" to Obama the new Stalin (or Hitler, depending on who you ask): are Americans retarded? Or why do politicians think they will profit from such campains?
The media are probably picking the most absurd examples and make it look like that's what's going on in the USA, yet channels like FOX News are there. They are real. They have an impact on people. Whatever happened to propper investigative journalism?
What do you guys think about all this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Oct 31, 2010 17:35:51 GMT -8
And Germans have a history of not shooting politicians they should have  ;D (if that was offensive I'll retract it) |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Oct 31, 2010 20:37:56 GMT -8
On a more serious note, I'm a big fan of the John Stewart's Rally to Restore Sanity.
But I'd say your average American just rolls their eyes at all the ridiculous polarization. One wonders however when the will of the people is going to be listened to a bit more in the political process?
It's like kids bickering- who's going to step up and be the mature one first?
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Nov 1, 2010 0:10:20 GMT -8
And Germans have a history of not shooting politicians they should have ;D (if that was offensive I'll retract it) Not offensive at all, only off topic (by the way, there were Germans who tried and came pretty close to killing Hitler). The only reason I made the historical reference was because I wanted to avoid side arguments like this one: namely that someone would reply concerning the political climate: "Well, in the past the political climate was even more agressive for many politicians have been shot in the course of time". In case you understood this as a supposed claim of German superiority, I assure you that this wasn't the intention. If you wish to speak about what's going (wr)on(g) in Germany, we can do this any time. On a more serious note, I'm a big fan of the John Stewart's Rally to Restore Sanity. But I'd say your average American just rolls their eyes at all the ridiculous polarization. One wonders however when the will of the people is going to be listened to a bit more in the political process? It's like kids bickering- who's going to step up and be the mature one first? I see. I guess politicians will only change their tactics if the results hurt. But that's rather unlikely if both alternatives exhibit the same conduct. |
|
|
|
Post by robin on Nov 1, 2010 11:27:42 GMT -8
Probably not the most credible person when it comes to restoring sanity, but it makes for a nice slogan. I just wonder where John Stewart was when he and others were referring to President Bush and modern day Hitler, or similar references.
By he way, I hear this type of complaint every 2-4 years and it is always the unpopular party that is doing the complaining. This time it is the Democrats complaining, but 4 years ago these same Democrats were calling Republicans and President Bush the same kind of derogatory terms that they now complain about. Personally I like the system how it is. I want to see that true colors of those who seek my vote. I want to hear what people realy think, and I want to see just how dirty someone is willing to get in order to get elected.
|
|
Michael
Intermediate Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by Michael on Nov 1, 2010 13:09:55 GMT -8
I want to see that true colors of those who seek my vote. I want to hear what people really think, and I want to see just how dirty someone is willing to get in order to get elected. I agree with you, Robin. It's not a perfect system, but I'd rather have freedom of all speech, rather than freedom of only government-sanctioned speech, like many nations live under today. Unfortunately, that means we have the freedom to be stupid. Like, if I hear one more person tell me that President Obama wasn't born in the United States because he hasn't produced his birth certificate, I think my head will explode! Yeah, and George Bush blew up the World Trade Center towers & the levees in New Orleans, Hillary Clinton shot Vince Foster and dragged him to Marcy Park, etc. If anything, people should focus on their policies, not on rumors fit only for tabloids. I don't watch much TV, nor do I listen to much local radio, so I've been pretty sheltered from political ads this election cycle. But I'm typically disinclined to vote for someone who resorts to dirty politics to get elected. And Moritz, I think (well, at least I hope  ) that most Americans are smarter than that. Incidentally, political mud-slinging is not a new phenomenon. You can find it in newspapers dating back to the 1700's. And for the record, though I share very little political common ground with President Obama, I pray regularly for his safety, and that he would have a long & peaceful life. |
|
Michael
Intermediate Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by Michael on Nov 1, 2010 13:26:18 GMT -8
...I'm wondering if the political climate in the USA has ever been this loaded with hate, defamation, aggression and - sometimes more, sometimes less subtle yet obviously deliberate falsehood... You know, I remember the 2000 presidential election between Al Gore and George Bush being pretty charged. And the beauty of the election's outcome, crazy as it was, having to wait well into December for the final decision, was that Americans accepted it, went on with their lives, and continued to work side by side with their peers, half of whom had voted for the other guy. There were no riots in the streets, no assassination attempts, no looting. That goes for the 2008 election, too. And I don't think it's because people had a laissez faire attitude about the outcome either. For the most part, I think we're just a pretty darn peaceful people. When it comes to elections, that is.  |
|
|
|
Post by robin on Nov 1, 2010 15:54:54 GMT -8
There is deep distrust of politicians(rightly so by the way), that even some very thoughtful people will buy into these kind of rumors. However, these rumors are as much and indictment of the politicians as those who buy into those rumors. If Obama was always honest and straight forward with the American people, very few would be so willing to believe that he potentially may not have been born in the US. Also, the fact that he refuses to even produce a birth certificate only feeds the fire.
I know this is off topic, but I believe that Obama has made a political decision not to release his birth certificate because it allows him to make his opponents (so called birthers) look silly, and to some degree it has worked.
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Nov 2, 2010 0:14:05 GMT -8
I agree with you, Robin. It's not a perfect system, but I'd rather have freedom of all speech, rather than freedom of only government-sanctioned speech, like many nations live under today. Hi Michael, First off, which nations do you refer to? Secondly, I don't think freedom of speech is the issue here. You for instance are free to speak your mind and still you don't compare Bush or Obama with Hitler. Why is that? Seemingly not because of lack of freedom of speech. To be free to do something doesn't mean one has to do it. And not to do something doesn't necessarily imply to hide the true colors. One might as well simply be a respectful person. It's good to see the true colors of politicians, I agree, but if the true colors turn out to be dirty I might as well not want to vote these people. We agree on that as well. But apparently there seems to be a gap between theory and praxis. Cause if people really wouldn't vote the mud-slingers, I would expect there to be less mud-slinging. As for your second post: Do you think this is simply a cultural thing? Like "cads' fighting when ended is soon mended"? That may well be true. From the outside things often look more serious than they really are. |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 2, 2010 6:41:22 GMT -8
It was simply a silly side-joke. I didn't read any intention like that into your post.
I like that last post, btw, Mo. It sums up my feelings pretty well.
I'm also not convinced that when a politician uses dirty politics that it merely reveals their character. I think they are doing it because it has been proven to work- which reveals the character of the masses as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Nov 2, 2010 7:39:59 GMT -8
The same freedom that allows Michael to choose not to compare Bush or Obama to Hitler, gives his neighbor the right to make to comparisons. It's a matter of choice. In many ways, I enjoy hearing unpopular speech because it means that I'm still free. In the end speech is only a reflection of the person, and even if you can silence the negative speech the person still exists. So if we truly want to change society we need to focus on the person and not the speech.
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Nov 2, 2010 7:53:57 GMT -8
I'm not quite sure what the difference is here. Anything that a person chooses to do reflects something about their character. If a politician runs negative adds in order to appease the masses, it reveals that the politician is willing to compromise their values in order to gain popularity. Some politicians won't make that compromise, and that reveals something positive about their character. This is one of the reasons I chose to support John McCain early on. He refused to attack Obama on anything besides the issues that mattered.
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Nov 2, 2010 8:16:44 GMT -8
The same freedom that allows Michael to choose not to compare Bush or Obama to Hitler, gives his neighbor the right to make to comparisons. It's a matter of choice. In many ways, I enjoy hearing unpopular speech because it means that I'm still free. In the end speech is only a reflection of the person, and even if you can silence the negative speech the person still exists. So if we truly want to change society we need to focus on the person and not the speech. I hear what you are saying. But don't you think the reaction of a society towards the behavior of the individual can actually shape the character of a person? It's a rhethoric question. That doesn't mean that there aren't people who will at best learn to hide the true colors. I hear that sociopaths are often at the top positions in politics and business... Anyway, as I said before, respectful communication doesn't stand at odds with freedom of speech. And I think I remember you advocating respectful communication as well. I think it was when someone made a joke about Sarah Palin. |
|
|
|
Post by robin on Nov 2, 2010 8:35:57 GMT -8
I hope to advocate for respectful speach in all cases, though I am human and tend to be more protective of those I agree with. By defending those I agree with I'm also defending myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Nov 2, 2010 9:45:01 GMT -8
|
|
Michael
Intermediate Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by Michael on Nov 2, 2010 14:07:28 GMT -8
Wow, OK, lots to comment on... I agree with you, Robin. It's not a perfect system, but I'd rather have freedom of all speech, rather than freedom of only government-sanctioned speech, like many nations live under today. First off, which nations do you refer to? Well, just off the top of my head, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Sudan, Libya... there are others, but these are a smattering of the countries I was thinking of. Places where your life or freedom would be in danger if you spoke out against the government, or didn't follow the "rules" regarding spoken or written religious or political speech. I agree with you. We can all agree that people should be civil, but I think Robin's and my point is that freedom of speech allows the part of a man's character, which can be reflected in his speech, to be tested. Just as Adam's character was tested in the garden, because he had the choice whether or not to eat of the forbidden fruit. Without that freedom, the choice can not be made, and one's true character is less likely to be discovered. That's all we're trying to say. That being said, since sociopaths and slick talkers can and do run for office, we must follow their policies closely, to decide whether they get to keep their jobs during reelection time. That is one of many areas where the American people have failed miserably, IMO. Moritz wrote: and Josh wrote: Would you really broad-brush the "masses" as being so gullible as to believe the "Taliban Dan" commercial? Certainly, some are swayed by mud-slinging, or the politician wouldn't use the tactic. But you'll notice how the mud gets bigger & dirtier when election day draws near. Who is he targeting at that point? The undecided and the apathetic, hoping to stir them up to vote for him. Not the reasonable majority, who don't care for such nonsense. Mud-slinging also seems to get worse when the candidate is losing, which leaves him grasping at straws to gain at the polls, and he reacts in a Hail Mary football pass sort of desperation. I think it absolutely is a cultural thing, though I wouldn't liken it solely to the ending of a barroom brawl. And maybe my comments sounded a little too altruistic. Let's face it: most Americans just don't care. Take voter turnout, for instance. We're consistently in the 40%, or 50% range at best. Germany is more like in the 70% to 80% range. Heck, Afghanistan does better than we do, and they risk getting shot or blown up for voting! We're pathetic that way. And we deserve what we get for politicians. But with respect to the half of Americans who do vote, we're a pretty passionate bunch. Most of the people I work with and do business with have beliefs that are diametrically opposite to my own. We hash it out at times, we argue, but at the end of the day, we respect each other. But my point in that post was that what you're seeing in this election cycle isn't necessarily the worst. It's the most memorable, because it's the most recent. But political climates have always ebbed and flowed in the US. Just like the global climate... but I'll save that for another thread |
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Nov 2, 2010 17:12:04 GMT -8
You guys are looking at this all wrong. You see, election time is one of the only opportunities to see all our favorite politicians in their most unflattering poses...on their opponents adds.
It's kind of like the Superbowl ads. If you're not into football, at least you have something to laugh at. ;D
|
|
;D
) that most Americans are smarter than that. 
