I think we are talking about two different issues but discussing them like they are one. There is a difference between polarization and radicalism. They are related but they are different things. Neither is good but I think the causes are not always the same.
You can oppose Obama and think he is too far to the left without thinking he was born in Kenya. You can oppose a public option and not want government to get their hands deeper into health care without thinking there will be death panels.
It isn't that I don't think we have a problem with how polarized things have gotten but if we are going to discuss it in a way that won’t cause further polarization then it has to be done equally. You can't just say yeah they were hard on Bush but hey the real concern is these nuts at town halls shouting down congressman and drawing funny poster of the president (and sorry the joker one was funny). For one thing we have the right to yell at our congressman and for another it comes off as more a political ploy then a real desire to correct the problem. I am not referring you or even this article specifically so much as the sudden push (almost solely from the left and directed at the right)for more civil discourse.
I agree that all of those things are a problem. I am just not sure how much to blame them for what is happening now. Fox gave the protesters a voice and Beck has poured grease on the fire but I think the fire was burning pretty good on its own. I know I knew about the movement and what was happening inside of it and I almost never watch Fox except for their Sunday show.
The town hall shouters were for the most part the same people being either laughed at or ignored when they held small protest across the country. They decided to up the anti and I don't really blame them. They didn't get ignored this time. I say they gave no worse then they got and if people want to complain about that they need to look at why these people felt the need to shout to be heard. I do wish we had access to the old wotmania boards because I said this would happen when people were making their teabag jokes.
Caving into the republicans? I think it would have been the center caving into the left if it had gone any other way. The democrats made a move to be a one party nation and failed they have no one to blame but themselves for that. How many shouts of “screw the wingnut republicans we can do what ever we want” did we hear. Turns out they were wrong.
Moving back to the center and finding a bipartisan bill that republicans will have to answer for not supporting would be a start. The democrats also have to accept the criticism and answer it. They can’t simply treat all concerns of spending and who will have control as nutjobs talking about death panels.
Sanity will restore it self in time. We have one of the oldest and most democracies in the world and this will hardly bring it down. Come next year democrats will realize they have to work across the isle to accomplish anything and the tone will change. Very likely come next election the democrats will lode their supermajority and will lose significant seats in the house if they don’t lose out right control. When that happens republicans will feel less threatened and more empowered and that should cool things down a lot.
Keep in mind one of the reasons republicans are as agitated as they are is they are so out of the power that they feel their way of life is threatened, that won’t last since we are still a center right country. I read an article today about MaCain actively recruiting and supporting center right republicans for primaries if he has any success that should help as well.
We can save that debate for Christmas when things get slow. Do you deny she called them un-American because I willing to only insult her for that and concede the high ground for now on the other.
We are talking perception here and if a large number of people think one candidate was given an unfair advantage then they will always be a small kernel of illegitimacy. The more who feel that way the more strongly they feel it the worse it gets. People have to have faith in the system and a free press is a critical component of that system.
I have been saying for some time now that the gross bias in the media was going to lead to a more radicalized nation and it is happening just about like I said it would. People resent the media and are turning to new sources for information. Watch some of the CNN videos of them covering the protest in Washington (not that they covered it much) the people there were as angry at CNN as the were at the politicians. Maybe they shouldn't have had Anderson call them teabaggers and chuckle about it.
Well I really can't disagree with anything you said there and I have to a degree using your post to rant but I do think you and Freedman are missing the point about why there is so much anger and resentment. I talk about lot issues here but this and adults who hurt children or the weak are my hot button issues.
Yes gerrymandering is a problem and it makes for ultra safe district that tend to breed radical politicians with a lot of seniority (present Pelosi as exhibit A). The primary system is a problem since it tends to give your general election candidates who are away from center. The problem with getting rid of gerrymandering is the courts won’t let you since it would reduce minority representatives. You since so many minorities are democrats you can’t allow gerrymandering only for them.
If we are talking partisanship in general then I agree that those are issues but not so much if we are talking the specifics of what is happening now. I think the immediate problem is People are angry and feel disrespected and ignored. Any solution that doesn't change that will only make things worse. They are ill served by the news sources they use and have lost trust in the news sources that would have in the past pulled them back to the center. If the media doesn't figure out a way to more equally delver the news and how to do it in a way that builds trust things we will continue to see problems like this.
Like I said I really don't have a problem with Friedman himself though I do think he is a little to full of him self (glad I never have to worry about that
). Like I said I was commenting on the general issue more then your article, which was unfair of me since you found what the most balanced article on this issue was likely. Speaking of that did you reads Brooks article on Rush being a paper tiger? I'll link here it since I thought it was interesting.
I hope at least some of that made sense but I had to rush and it is hard to rush a rant.
You can oppose Obama and think he is too far to the left without thinking he was born in Kenya. You can oppose a public option and not want government to get their hands deeper into health care without thinking there will be death panels.
It isn't that I don't think we have a problem with how polarized things have gotten but if we are going to discuss it in a way that won’t cause further polarization then it has to be done equally. You can't just say yeah they were hard on Bush but hey the real concern is these nuts at town halls shouting down congressman and drawing funny poster of the president (and sorry the joker one was funny). For one thing we have the right to yell at our congressman and for another it comes off as more a political ploy then a real desire to correct the problem. I am not referring you or even this article specifically so much as the sudden push (almost solely from the left and directed at the right)for more civil discourse.
The negative effects of the importance of money in election campaigns, the gerrymandering, the crazy rants of Dobbs, Limbaugh, Olbermann and others, and so on, those are not new topics, they've been criticized many times before, including by myself.
I agree that all of those things are a problem. I am just not sure how much to blame them for what is happening now. Fox gave the protesters a voice and Beck has poured grease on the fire but I think the fire was burning pretty good on its own. I know I knew about the movement and what was happening inside of it and I almost never watch Fox except for their Sunday show.
I agree that things are getting worse right now but I do think such things go in cycles. I simply don't agree that the media over hyping things is the primary cause for things slipping. If you look back at my post I have been saying for some time that insulting and dismissing the critics of the administration and the blatant bias shown by the media was going radicalize people. When the media and the democrats insulted and dismissed these people they made a tactical error. They didn't realize that for every person shouting at a town hall there were thousands who at least sympathized with them. The more they attempted to dismiss these people the more the angered their supporters and spread the movement.
I'm sorry, but the radicality was there from the very start. Of course Pelosi didn't help matters, but it's not as if she caused it. Just look at those townhalls - those were filled with furious people shouting down the Congressmen before they'd even said anything.
The town hall shouters were for the most part the same people being either laughed at or ignored when they held small protest across the country. They decided to up the anti and I don't really blame them. They didn't get ignored this time. I say they gave no worse then they got and if people want to complain about that they need to look at why these people felt the need to shout to be heard. I do wish we had access to the old wotmania boards because I said this would happen when people were making their teabag jokes.
And a number of the things mentioned in the article were already going on even before the health care reform issue was put on the table at all - of course that exacerbated matters, but then it is an important issue so it's normal people have strong opinions on it. But with the way things have been going, caving in to the Republicans on this or even shelving the whole reform isn't going to restore sanity to the nation.
Caving into the republicans? I think it would have been the center caving into the left if it had gone any other way. The democrats made a move to be a one party nation and failed they have no one to blame but themselves for that. How many shouts of “screw the wingnut republicans we can do what ever we want” did we hear. Turns out they were wrong.
Moving back to the center and finding a bipartisan bill that republicans will have to answer for not supporting would be a start. The democrats also have to accept the criticism and answer it. They can’t simply treat all concerns of spending and who will have control as nutjobs talking about death panels.
Sanity will restore it self in time. We have one of the oldest and most democracies in the world and this will hardly bring it down. Come next year democrats will realize they have to work across the isle to accomplish anything and the tone will change. Very likely come next election the democrats will lode their supermajority and will lose significant seats in the house if they don’t lose out right control. When that happens republicans will feel less threatened and more empowered and that should cool things down a lot.
Keep in mind one of the reasons republicans are as agitated as they are is they are so out of the power that they feel their way of life is threatened, that won’t last since we are still a center right country. I read an article today about MaCain actively recruiting and supporting center right republicans for primaries if he has any success that should help as well.
And sorry the speaker of the house doesn't get to use the term Nazi in any fashion when referring to peaceful protesters and then act like she was not trying to imply they were Nazis. You may choose to defend her by splitting hairs over what she said but we all know the message she was trying to send and I judge her by her intent. She damn sure doesn't get be all weepy afterwards and wring her hands over the tone of the argument after throwing terms like Nazi and un-American around.
You know very well that you are the one twisting and turning her words into something suiting your ideology. If you can even call it that; "use the term Nazi" is quite simply an outright lie as she didn't use the word. "Splitting hairs" doesn't enter into it. Saying "Nancy Pelosi called the protestors Nazis!" is one thing if you've only heard it through the grapevine and don't know the details of the matter, but you can hardly claim ignorance as an excuse for your statements, so the only thing left is malevolence. Shame on you. The sad part is that since that moment wasn't exactly Pelosi's finest hour, you'd have plenty of room for genuine criticism without any need for malevolent lies.
We can save that debate for Christmas when things get slow. Do you deny she called them un-American because I willing to only insult her for that and concede the high ground for now on the other.
There are reasons why the last few presidents have been seen as less then legitimate. Clinton was only able to win because the crazy little dwarf pulled so many votes from Bush and Dole. Clinton never received 50% of the popular vote so he always operated mandate free. Bush of course had the 2000 vote going against him even though he did get more then 50% in 2004. With Obama I think the majority of people are not bothered so much by the question of if he was born in the US, the majority know they are being disingenuous with that and simply refuse to admit it, but they think he was helped by a biased media who had their thumb on the scale. Who did things like run hit pieces on McCain and his family but refused to vet Obama. He amplified every mistake Palin made but laughed off glary and shocking errors made by the much more experienced Biden. The ignored things like even with all the damnation of lobbyist Biden’s own son is a lobbyist.
Sure, but when you have two or three like that in a row, it becomes a pattern, and a whole generation grows up who's never known a president whose legitimacy wasn't in doubt. And then one day you find yourself electing a moderate by a solid margin of victory, someone who in days past would have had broad support, and see that the radical elements of the losing side still treat him as if he wasn't president. And honestly, the supposed reasons to doubt Obama's legitimacy are rather shaky - his election victory was clear, there's no real reason why he wouldn't be legitimate. He's not a moderate like Clinton, that's true, but that's something else.
We are talking perception here and if a large number of people think one candidate was given an unfair advantage then they will always be a small kernel of illegitimacy. The more who feel that way the more strongly they feel it the worse it gets. People have to have faith in the system and a free press is a critical component of that system.
I have been saying for some time now that the gross bias in the media was going to lead to a more radicalized nation and it is happening just about like I said it would. People resent the media and are turning to new sources for information. Watch some of the CNN videos of them covering the protest in Washington (not that they covered it much) the people there were as angry at CNN as the were at the politicians. Maybe they shouldn't have had Anderson call them teabaggers and chuckle about it.
So yes things have gotten worse of late but it isn't because Fox News ran clips of ACORN helping set up childhood white slavery rings so much as the rest refusing to do so until Fox forced their hand. Why is Fox always the first one to get these clips out there? Are they simply so much better or do the others just not want to run them?
I'm not saying that Fox or the right in general is solely responsible for things being worse at all. I have the impression, for instance, that Obama seems to make more snide comments and attacks on his political opponents than is common for a president, and Pelosi's "I think they're astroturf, they were waving swastikas" comment was pretty sad even without your wilful misinterpretation. What Friedman is saying and what I'm saying is that, while of course any particular statement or attack or action is the responsibility of the person who makes it, an atmosphere has been created in which those things are increasingly normal, and that will be very hard to turn back. Sarah Palin is responsible for her death panels comment, Obama was responsible for his questionable comments in the Gates case, but in the background the polarization of the US and the changes in the media bear part of the responsibility for both as well.
Well I really can't disagree with anything you said there and I have to a degree using your post to rant but I do think you and Freedman are missing the point about why there is so much anger and resentment. I talk about lot issues here but this and adults who hurt children or the weak are my hot button issues.
Yes gerrymandering is a problem and it makes for ultra safe district that tend to breed radical politicians with a lot of seniority (present Pelosi as exhibit A). The primary system is a problem since it tends to give your general election candidates who are away from center. The problem with getting rid of gerrymandering is the courts won’t let you since it would reduce minority representatives. You since so many minorities are democrats you can’t allow gerrymandering only for them.
If we are talking partisanship in general then I agree that those are issues but not so much if we are talking the specifics of what is happening now. I think the immediate problem is People are angry and feel disrespected and ignored. Any solution that doesn't change that will only make things worse. They are ill served by the news sources they use and have lost trust in the news sources that would have in the past pulled them back to the center. If the media doesn't figure out a way to more equally delver the news and how to do it in a way that builds trust things we will continue to see problems like this.
You may have linked a Friedman article, who I agree can’t be seen as a person solidly in one camp or another though I do think he leans left, but Friedman was hardly the first to raise this issue and he is more giving voice to others argument then he is making one his self.
Is he? I think he did an intentional attempt to point out that this is a thing from both sides, and liberals reading his column who think it's all the right's fault might perhaps reconsider that stance when they see his "24 years" comments.
Like I said I really don't have a problem with Friedman himself though I do think he is a little to full of him self (glad I never have to worry about that
). Like I said I was commenting on the general issue more then your article, which was unfair of me since you found what the most balanced article on this issue was likely. Speaking of that did you reads Brooks article on Rush being a paper tiger? I'll link here it since I thought it was interesting.I hope at least some of that made sense but I had to rush and it is hard to rush a rant.
Where Did "We" Go?
- 01/10/2009 09:30:12 PM
697 Views
How do you change this though?
- 01/10/2009 10:51:10 PM
331 Views
Pelosi is part of the problem
- 01/10/2009 11:10:45 PM
320 Views
that was hyperbole, as he's said OVER AND OVER
- 02/10/2009 06:21:16 PM
299 Views
really which elected leaders on the right talked about death panels?
- 02/10/2009 06:41:05 PM
319 Views
Dumb column from Friedman.....read a history book.....
- 01/10/2009 11:15:46 PM
340 Views
I disagree, obviously.
- 02/10/2009 12:11:48 AM
403 Views
No, it hasn't always been like this; I think Watergate changed it, and maybe Vietnam.
- 02/10/2009 02:13:07 AM
404 Views
remarkably, i agree with the troll
- 02/10/2009 06:27:40 AM
334 Views
Partisanship, yes, but this is more than that.
- 02/10/2009 06:57:14 AM
399 Views
i see things at a different level than you do
- 02/10/2009 07:31:24 AM
325 Views
Personally, I think you're seeing the cart rather than the horse, but that's just me.
- 02/10/2009 08:14:46 AM
433 Views
- 02/10/2009 08:14:46 AM
433 Views
Not true
- 02/10/2009 12:32:58 AM
326 Views
why did we fight the Spanish American War and the War of 1812 again?
- 02/10/2009 04:18:56 AM
286 Views
You just completely undermined your point
- 02/10/2009 06:22:54 AM
337 Views
I think the role of cable news is over played
- 01/10/2009 11:29:26 PM
330 Views
Possibly.
- 02/10/2009 12:02:05 AM
338 Views
To many people distrust the media for it to be just the right who distrust them
- 02/10/2009 04:15:50 AM
383 Views
i agree that the fringe has way more power than it should, but...
- 02/10/2009 06:38:41 AM
324 Views
I think Friedman puts it very well when he says...
- 02/10/2009 11:24:02 AM
298 Views
did I read this correctly?
- 02/10/2009 03:00:33 PM
327 Views
As I already told you, this is not about "the left" complaining.
- 02/10/2009 03:38:15 PM
410 Views
it didn't become an issue until it started hurting the left
- 02/10/2009 04:44:29 PM
302 Views
Eh, many aspects of it have been criticized for a long time.
- 02/10/2009 09:12:22 PM
364 Views
also, about clinton, since you say you were too young to remember...
- 02/10/2009 06:47:45 AM
426 Views
really because my memory goes back further then that and things were nasty then to
- 02/10/2009 03:04:58 PM
292 Views