Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tipping point? I think after the 2010 Midterms when any semblance of trying to enact policy went out the window in Congress. Since then, US government has been in complete dysfunction mode.
Key Contributing factors?
- Post-Reconstruction Era backlash and enactment of Jim Crow
- McCarthyism
- Southern Strategy
- Grover Norquist anti-tax extremism
- Contract with America and rise of Congressional Republican brinksmanship
- Iraq vote as litmus test for Democrats
- Citizens United and rise of TEA Party (esp. post Obamacare Town Hall demonstrations)
Ultimately, though, I think every single thing boils down to the lingering unresolved issues from slavery. Not the lingering racism which is rampant in most Western democracies, but many unresolved issues post slavery. While I think most Americans are unconflicted about the moral benefits of ending slavery, we have never fully grappled with the philosophical meaning of Federalism from a social or economic standpoint. Racism is part of the legacy, but so is fighting over the welfare state, corporatism, wealth inequality, etc.
Agree with much of this and was going to bring up Grover Norquist specifically. But I think it started in 1994, and turned worse in 2010. Gingrich becoming Speaker and the crowd that was elected that year was the beginning of the end of bipartisan cooperation in Congress.
Anonymous wrote:The Civil War was the first indicator that the Founding Fathers had not devised a perfect form of government.
We've been lucky that the glue holding us together hasn't come undone more frequently.
Early on, we benefited from having a wide-open frontier in the west to maintain economic expansion.
And in the years after WW2, we benefited from being the last-man-standing, so the world market was wide-open for us.
But when economic growth falters, the fault lines re-emerge, the people become restless and discontent, and the gears of the government grind under the strain.
Anonymous wrote:"It's a fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas." - Perfect example!
No, it's a declaration by the Supreme Court. It's not a fact. It's a religion for some.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tipping point? I think after the 2010 Midterms when any semblance of trying to enact policy went out the window in Congress. Since then, US government has been in complete dysfunction mode.
Key Contributing factors?
- Post-Reconstruction Era backlash and enactment of Jim Crow
- McCarthyism
- Southern Strategy
- Grover Norquist anti-tax extremism
- Contract with America and rise of Congressional Republican brinksmanship
- Iraq vote as litmus test for Democrats
- Citizens United and rise of TEA Party (esp. post Obamacare Town Hall demonstrations)
Ultimately, though, I think every single thing boils down to the lingering unresolved issues from slavery. Not the lingering racism which is rampant in most Western democracies, but many unresolved issues post slavery. While I think most Americans are unconflicted about the moral benefits of ending slavery, we have never fully grappled with the philosophical meaning of Federalism from a social or economic standpoint. Racism is part of the legacy, but so is fighting over the welfare state, corporatism, wealth inequality, etc.
Agree with much of this and was going to bring up Grover Norquist specifically. But I think it started in 1994, and turned worse in 2010. Gingrich becoming Speaker and the crowd that was elected that year was the beginning of the end of bipartisan cooperation in Congress.
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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When Reagan did away with the Fairness Doctrine. This gave birth to Fox, a right wing propaganda network. The people are misinformed and tricked on Fox and don't know fact from fiction.
Are you telling me there was a doctrine that hindered freedom of the press until Reagan did away with it? Bravo to Ronald Reagan.
LOL. Are you really that undereducated?! The Fairness Doctrine insisted on proven facts only and if any opinion was given, it had to be identified as an opinion and a counter argument provided immediately. Newscasters wouldn't say "It was a hot day today" they would say, "It was 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
How can the facts without opinion possibly be bad? Are you incapable of thinking for yourself?
So you like the thought police to control the airwaves based on their set of "facts"? F**k no.
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.
It has to do with whether or not you feel that it is a decision best left up to the individual or best left up to the state.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Got it now. What's your stand on abortion?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the read. So you feel that senators should support their constituents before their interests? How wonderful it must be when the two are the same.
Supporting D or R before the interests of residents of the state is a bad thing. If you're R, you're going to support and concentrate on the R platform and same with D if you're D.
You're disconnected from the will of the people of your state and more interested in party politics. Got it now?
What does that have to do with the 17th amendment?
Anonymous wrote:And yet, the choice to not join the union is not always there, right?