When did it begin? When will it end?

[curtinsea]

I have followed American politics since I got out of high school in 1984. At that time things were good, there were plenty of jobs, I was working a skilled trade in a booming industry, and generally every body was doing well.

By 1987 the "Iran-contra" scandal was in full force, and Democrats who had baited a trap were now pouncing on the kill. This was the first political scandal I was really aware of and looked into close enough to form an opinion on (I have read plenty on Watergate, but I was 8 when Nixon resigned so I don't really have a reaction to it). The gist of that opinion is that the stakes of American politics were very high, and gamesmanship was the order of business.

1988 was a great year for me, I was working as an independent contractor, making lots of money for kid my age who didn't go to college, and I was a proud Republican. When the fall elections rolled around, I was really surprised by how many in my industry were Dems. I hadn't yet realized Seattle was a leftist capital, but I didn't know how so many in my industry could vote against their own interests. But i was convinced there would never be another Democrat in the White House, the sting of the Carter years was still strong, and Bush got elected fairly easily. But what a disaster he was. Pusillanimous is the word I used to describe this President, and with the help of new taxes, a tanking economy, and that little midget Ross Perot, a charming young Democrat got into office with just a plurality of votes.

To me, this is where it started. And by it, I mean the ugly, destructive, win at all cost, make the other guy lose no matter what, all-in every hand type of politics we see today. So who is to blame? It would be easy to say it was the Republicans in general and Newt Gingrich in particular. But that's not fair. I know whose fault it is.

It's ours

The election cycle of 1994 was the most childish thing I had ever seen. Republicans didn't run on their list of issues, they ran against Bill Clinton. "Do you want more like HIM?" was basically the message, and the sad thing is IT WORKED.

Now that was more than 16 years ago, and ever since, the two parties are virtually identical, they are sold out, the get nothing done, regardless of who is in charge or what they say they are going to do. It's all spite, and hate, and anger, and brinksmanship, and it hasn't served the people of America since. And who is to blame? WE ARE! You don't believe me? Just look at the threads in this poli-pit and see for yourself, we bicker back and forth, accusing, name calling, attacking, insulting, belittling . . . . there is no policy discussion, no assertion of ideas nor ideals, none. We do their bidding, and the wheel goes round and round.

So when will it end? Not until WE end it. Not until we can discuss issues honestly and intellectually amongst ourselves, with a willingness to look at the points made by the other side. Not until we look beyond the rhetoric that the politicians and pundits use to lead us by the nose. Not until we stop throwing rocks at each other, and not only talk but listen to each other.

And not until we are willing to replace, at the polls, elected officials who fail us. And that means even if it's our guy, if he isn't doing the job, he needs to go. As long as we give him a pass so as not to let "the other guy" win, we get what we've gotten.

[skyguy2007]

Good points, the politicians LOVE the "US vs. THEM" situation, it's what keeps "THEM" in office as long as we follow along and keep looking at what they state are problems instead of real issues.

Signed...The Fence Sitter aka The Equal Opportunity Political Hater

[skyguy2007]

Good points, the politicians LOVE the "US vs. THEM" situation, it's what keeps "THEM" in office as long as we follow along and keep looking at what they state are problems instead of real issues.

Signed...The Fence Sitter aka The Equal Opportunity Political Hater

[curtinsea]

I made a bet with my Dad in 2004 that GWB would get re-elected. He was as certain he couldn't get re-elected because of the wars going on as I was positive he couldn't be beaten with McGovern's campaign . . . and now here we are so many years later and it is soon to be his guy running for re-election with THOSE SAME WARS still going on.

Classic American politics

[skyguy2007]

The sad part in my opinion, the wars have almost nothing to do with freedom.

[billynomates]

When I was growing up in UK we had 3 'heavyweight' newspapers-The Times(considered independent-slightlty right if anything) Telegraph(right) and Guardian (left). The Times now owned by News International so is either left/right depending which is in Murdoch's best interest. The Telegraph owned by The Barclays-tax exiles and eccentric and the Guardian is full of in-fighting among staff. The BBC is supposed to be impartial but is considered 'very left'. Sky TV is owned by Murdoch.(I v rarely watch TV. I find It extremely hard to get unbiased opinions on politics. Our PM is an ex public relations officer following the last elected PM(a lawyer). Seems the political parties have to have someone who looks good/speaks well even if they've nothing to say.

I find 'The Economist' about the most impartial publication I know (it came out for 'Obama' last election btw). If anyone disagrees with me or can put forward other publications which attempt to be impartial I'd be interested to read them.

[curtinsea]

You are always going to find bias in journalism . . . they teach you in school that a story has to have "an angle". Angle, or slant, these are synonyms of bias. That is why you shouldn't shun "FoxNews" because you think it is biased for the right, because then you are only getting your news biased from the left. You only recognize that FoxNews is baised for the right because you are used to seeing your news biased from the left. (I say you as a generalization, not any one specific person)

Read the story from both angles, decide for yourself. Call bullshit when you see it. THINK

[motherfunky]

Excellent posts by curt and skyguy, absolutely sums the situation up. Im sort of shocked how much I agree with them.

[trauma]

Good point Curt. I can't tell you how many times I've voted for someone not because I thought he/she was the best for the Job but more because he/she was the lesser of two evils. So I wasn't really voting for someone I was more voting against the other. Sad but true.

[Nynus]

I know it seems that politics is getting dirtier, nastier, and even more and more partisan. But when you look back at history, you'll find that it was just as ugly and sometimes even worse.

Lies, dirty tricks, rat fucking, innuendo, rumors, and fraud have marred the political process from the start of this country. Democracy has always been rife with flaming rhetoric and rabid partisanship and hopefully it doesn't stop anytime soon. The alternative is either bullets and killing, or apathy and decay.

The debates we see today may be frustrating and sometimes even disgusting to watch. Like Otto von Bismarck said, "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made."

Well, electing the law makers is sometimes even worse. There's butchery, dismemberment, chopping, grinding, adding this, adding that, then you shove the whole mess together, add heat, and then try and get someone to consume it.

Here's some examples:

-- In the 1880's Republicans sent "Soapy Sams" into Indiana with hundreds of thousands of two dollar bills in order to purchase votes.

-- In 1840, a Whig politician Thomas Elder wrote: "Passion and prejudice properly aroused and directed do about as well as principle and reason in any party contest."

-- In 1856, South Carolina Rep. Preston Brooks nearly beat to death Massachusetts Sen. Charles Sumner, a strong abolitionist, with his cane on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

-- During the Election of 1884, things got really ugly. Both the Republican and Democratic parties fractured. Reformer Republicans, know as "Mugwumps" defected the party, and at the same time the Democrats lost part of their party to the "Greenback-Labor" party. The campaign included corruption charges, moral indiscretions, sex, racism, and more. This campaign also included the famous chant, "Ma, Ma, where's my Pa? In the White House, Ha, Ha, Ha!"

-- In the election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson hired a hack writer to attack incumbent John Adams. He was accused of being "“repulsive pedant” and of having “a hideous hermaphroditical character.”

-- Late in the 19th century, Martin Van Buren was accused of wearing women's corset by Davy Crockett.

-- James Buchanan's opponents started a rumor that he had tried to hang himself because he had a congenital condition that caused his head to tilt to the left.

-- The election of 1964 ran rampant with rat fucking. Lyndon Johnson had a secret group called "The Five O'Clock Club" that set out to destroy the public image of Goldwater. They sent letters to newspapers claiming to be ordinary citizens terrified of Goldwater. CIA agent Howard Hunt, (the same one that later played a role in watergate) infiltrated the Goldwater campaign headquarters, and fed advance copies of speeches to the White House. They even had a children's coloring book published, where you could color pictures of Goldwater dressed in Ku Klux Klan robes. Most of these tricks were later copied and expanded in the Nixon campaign.

I could go on, and on, and on..... Books have been written about it, and they're fun to read. I get a good chuckle out of seeing some of the machinations and strategies that were employed in the past. Some of them were feeble and some were devastating, but they all had one thing in common -- trying to convince the public that "The other guy is worse than me!"

Media bias wasn't unheard of in history either. William Randolph Hearst made MSNBC and Fox News look like child's play in comparison. He invented Yellow journalism and sensationalized stories that had little if any truth in them.

The media took a front seat in deciding a lot of elections as well. In the Johnson/Goldwater election that I mentioned above, the media was basically an extension of the Johnson campaign. During this time, Johnson's aides purposefully fed lies and innuendo about the Goldwater campaign to the press and they ran with it without verification.

Many historians agree that the only difference between the Johnson campaign of 1964, and Nixon's campaign of 1972 was that Nixon got caught. Up until that time, rat fucking was an accepted part of politics ON BOTH SIDES.

Obama's birth certificate; "I can see Alaska from my house"; "I'm not a witch"; Rev Jeremiah Wright; and many many more, are all par for the course when it comes to politics.

It's not going to stop either. Why? Because it works.