No Matter Who You Are Tell Me When You Think Our Current Form of Government Became Dysfunctional?

[Anonymous]

1970s when lobbying started to go big time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is going to be a must-check in. The perspective of some people is hilarious.

I had no idea Republicans were the only ones that used actual money for their campaigns, that's amazing!

Do Democrats require just cupcakes and warm hugs to pay for their ads, literature and manpower?

I think they require the point of a sword....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Surprised there was not a revolution during the Great Depression

I'm not a student of history, but perhaps FDR did a good job holding the pieces of society together.

The New Deal helped to retain the political support of the poor.

And perhaps FDR convinced a fair number of wealthy voters that it was too big a gamble to simply hope that Adam Smith's invisible hand would lift the economy off of its back. So the rich reluctantly supported the New Deal.

Just a guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was it with Nixon? Jimmy Carter? Trickle Down Economics? The New Deal under FDR? Hillary, Bill, W, James Madison?

This is a great question My memory is the hatred for Bill Clinton right out of the box, maybe because of don't ask, don't tell. But the right had genuine hatred there - Richard Vugurie and the direct mail campaigns against him. That's when it started in my recollection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was it with Nixon? Jimmy Carter? Trickle Down Economics? The New Deal under FDR? Hillary, Bill, W, James Madison?

This is a great question My memory is the hatred for Bill Clinton right out of the box, maybe because of don't ask, don't tell. But the right had genuine hatred there - Richard Vugurie and the direct mail campaigns against him. That's when it started in my recollection.

Viguerie

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is going to be a must-check in. The perspective of some people is hilarious.

I had no idea Republicans were the only ones that used actual money for their campaigns, that's amazing!

Do Democrats require just cupcakes and warm hugs to pay for their ads, literature and manpower?

I think they require the point of a sword....

....no, they sell uranium for Russian kick-back, and launder it through their Foundation. How clever.

[Anonymous]

The end of the Fairness Doctrine without doubt. Propaganda changes everything. Add in Citizens United and you have a perfect storm of dysfunction and failure. We now live in two totally separate realities thanks to both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the choice to not join the union is not always there, right?

Depends on the state. If the state is Right to Wprk, like VA, you have the choice. Other states you do not.

Yes, you must accede to an authority with no constitutional power to confiscate part of your property (your earned pay) so that you may earn a living. Effff that.


Also unconstitutional under the first amendment, freedom of association. Freedom of association also includes the freedom not to, except when union leadership decides otherwise. Tyrannical in every way.

Actually, you never have to join a union. People who work at jobs that are covered by a collective bargaining agreement can opt to pay agency fees, instead. Or, alternatively, you could GET A DIFFERENT JOB. Nobody is forcing you to take those great wages and benefits that have been negotiated on your behalf by your union. Go see what it's like at a job without one.

Yes, why is it that "right to work" states have the worst pay rates?

http://www.epi.org/publication/right-to-work-states-have-lower-wages/

Under federal law, no one can be forced to join a union as a condition of employment, and the Supreme Court has made clear that workers cannot be forced to pay dues used for political purposes. So-called right-to-work (RTW) legislation goes one step further and entitles employees to the benefits of a union contract—including the right to have the union take up their grievance if their employer abuses them—without paying any of the cost.

This means that if an employer mistreats a worker who does not pay a union representation fee, the union must prosecute that worker’s grievance just as it would a dues-paying member’s, even if it costs tens of thousands of dollars. Non-dues-paying workers would also receive the higher wages and benefits their dues-paying coworkers enjoy. RTW laws have nothing to do with whether people can be forced to join a union or contribute to a political cause they do not support; that is already illegal. Nor do RTW laws have anything to do with the right to have a job or be provided employment.

At their core, RTW laws seek to hamstring unions’ ability to help employees bargain with their employers for better wages, benefits, and working conditions. Given that unionization raises wages both for individual union members as well as for nonunion workers in unionized sectors, it is not surprising that research shows that both union and nonunion workers in RTW states have lower wages and fewer benefits, on average, than comparable workers in other states.

[Anonymous]

Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America.

[Anonymous]

I'll also agree that it was the suspension of the Fairness Doctrine that has sent the US government on its current path of dysfunction. With that change, the door was left wide open for misinformation in political campaign and news, opinions pretending to be facts, etc. With that dishonesty, it allowed lobbying to be kicked into shameless levels of overdrive and then you need gobs of dark money to keep up the facade of lies every election cycle.

It all goes back to the Fairness Doctrine. When you're no longer bound to speak honestly, the entire process devolves into bullshit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was it with Nixon? Jimmy Carter? Trickle Down Economics? The New Deal under FDR? Hillary, Bill, W, James Madison?

This is a great question My memory is the hatred for Bill Clinton right out of the box, maybe because of don't ask, don't tell. But the right had genuine hatred there - Richard Vugurie and the direct mail campaigns against him. That's when it started in my recollection.

A lot of it was specifically directed at Hillary. She was the first First Lady to hold an advanced degree and have a successful career of her own, and she openly bristled at playing the traditional role of FLOTUS.

I grew up in the Midwest, and she was the constant butt of misogynistic jokes. I remember bumper stickers like, "I can't stand the President...and her husband" (or something like that). She was reviled. And while she had some rough corners, the only tangible reason was the fact that she subverted gender expectations.

You can't have serious conversations about how the decline of the primacy of white, males in society is what has opened up so many rifts in America since we haven't really addressed the fallout in a meaningful way, but Occam's Razor applied to historical events would make this the most obvious explanation.

[Anonymous]

1990 when the Bush Immigration Act was passed that made it legal to import millions of guest workers to replace US citizens. it took a few years but the large multi-national corporations have found ways to completely abandon hire US workers. in IT whole floors are all Indians. No US college graduates need apply.

This coupled with the push for more globalization has resulted in hire incomes for the 1% and lower incomes for the middle class. Add to it that the US Business schools are creating more MBAs without ethics. No moral code, every man or woman for themselves. Gov is just a reflection of how big business has screwed the US.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/books/review/golden-passport-duff-mcdonald.html?_r=0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was it with Nixon? Jimmy Carter? Trickle Down Economics? The New Deal under FDR? Hillary, Bill, W, James Madison?

This is a great question My memory is the hatred for Bill Clinton right out of the box, maybe because of don't ask, don't tell. But the right had genuine hatred there - Richard Vugurie and the direct mail campaigns against him. That's when it started in my recollection.

A lot of it was specifically directed at Hillary. She was the first First Lady to hold an advanced degree and have a successful career of her own, and she openly bristled at playing the traditional role of FLOTUS.

I grew up in the Midwest, and she was the constant butt of misogynistic jokes. I remember bumper stickers like, "I can't stand the President...and her husband" (or something like that). She was reviled. And while she had some rough corners, the only tangible reason was the fact that she subverted gender expectations.

You can't have serious conversations about how the decline of the primacy of white, males in society is what has opened up so many rifts in America since we haven't really addressed the fallout in a meaningful way, but Occam's Razor applied to historical events would make this the most obvious explanation.

Maybe, but I formed a very negative impression of her early on when she fired the White House travel staff. They were non-partisan and didn't do anything wrong to be put out on the street. She said she didn't have anything to do with it. Then the secrecy with her West Wing working group on healthcare. Sorry - I was open minded on her but I think the lying and penchant for secrecy gave her a bad reputation that has persisted ever since.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was it with Nixon? Jimmy Carter? Trickle Down Economics? The New Deal under FDR? Hillary, Bill, W, James Madison?

This is a great question My memory is the hatred for Bill Clinton right out of the box, maybe because of don't ask, don't tell. But the right had genuine hatred there - Richard Vugurie and the direct mail campaigns against him. That's when it started in my recollection.

A lot of it was specifically directed at Hillary. She was the first First Lady to hold an advanced degree and have a successful career of her own, and she openly bristled at playing the traditional role of FLOTUS.

I grew up in the Midwest, and she was the constant butt of misogynistic jokes. I remember bumper stickers like, "I can't stand the President...and her husband" (or something like that). She was reviled. And while she had some rough corners, the only tangible reason was the fact that she subverted gender expectations.

You can't have serious conversations about how the decline of the primacy of white, males in society is what has opened up so many rifts in America since we haven't really addressed the fallout in a meaningful way, but Occam's Razor applied to historical events would make this the most obvious explanation.

Yes, I think her boldness to challenge gender roles pissed off a lot of people. The baking cookies comment, healthcare, etc. Initially from her actions and then ongoing for DECADES with the Koch Bros smear campaign.

Maybe once that generation of misogynists dies off we can move forward.

[Anonymous]

I'm a democrat but feel like the lack of inherent respect for the office of President started with W.

That's when we started painting each other with extreme brushes. So honestly probably 9/11