Democratic Party; entertainers?

[Buffy]

For those of you who want to see how low politics in America has descended, check out this negative ad for the senate seat in Tennessee. Its hard to believe its *not* a parody. Its also not local: its produced directly by the Republican National Committee....talk about "entertaining"....

 

Can't we all just...get along,

Buffy

[TheBigDog]

Johnson and Bush 41 were excellent examples of guys who could cut deals because they'd spent the time in Congress to know that working together *across* party lines is the only way to get anything done.

Bush 41 is one of my favorite examples of the escalation divisive politics in the US. And it was not his actions, but the reactions to his actions.

 

Taking a step back, Reagan was known as "The Great Communicator". When Bush 41 came into office I immediately thought of him as "The Great Compromiser". Perhaps "Collaborator" would have been a softer word. But that is neither here nor there.

 

In his election campaign Bush 41 had spoken the now infamous words "Read my lips; no new taxes." Then during his term as President, as his compromising nature dictated, he reached across the aisle and stuck a budget deal that included a tax hike. During election years every Joe Citizen with a microphone stuck in front of his face talks about how they want someone who can break political deadlock. Every suddenly centrist politicians talk about how they are uniquely qualified to be the person in Washington who can reach across the aisle and find compromise. So it seems that reaching across the aisle to form a compromise budget that included a tax hike in spite of breaking an election promise would be one of the smartest political moved in history?

 

Think again. In the 92 election Bush 41 was hammered by Bill Clinton for being a liar for having broken his word to the American people on the no tax pledge. What I found astounding about this is that the tax hike in question was part of the Democratic agenda. Bush 41 pushed this part of his opposition's agenda for whatever political reason at the time, and it was that very opposition who's agenda had benefited from the action that hammered him for doing it. And it was specifically that act that the press and the Democrats hammered over and over again in the 92 election.

 

The ultimate results of the election were much more complicated, with the role of Ross Perot being central to the final tally. But hindsight leads me to believe that this issue was one of the pivotal moments in the changing landscape of American politics that has lead to the more firmly drawn lines that we see today.

 

What should Bush 41 have done as President? Should he have stuck to his pledge and resisted any tax hike of any kind? Or should he have adjusted his policy to find compromise between the parties and break the political logjam?

 

Bill

[Zythryn]

Hey BD

 

Looking at Bush 41 in hindsight, if I could change his actions I would say the only thing I would have had him do differently is not to have made a seemingly set in stone promise as 'Read my lips, no new taxes'.

 

I think the best results is when one party is in the whitehouse and another in charge of the legistlature. Reagan was a great unifyer. Even though I didn't agree with some of his positions, I applaud him for being able to get people with different viewpoints to work together.

 

A big problem is that elections have become a game of marketing. Make cute soundbites and promise anything you want. Making the other guy look bad or demonizing the individual or the party gets results. And there are no consiquences to lying or breaking promises.

 

As long as you can get elected with marketing over substance, I think that elections are going to get worse and worse.

 

I think sites that look at the statements of politicians and check there factual content are a good start. I would still like to see some sort of penalty for lies though, or real time fact checking during depates or even commercials. I think that would help.

[TheBigDog]

For those of you who want to see how low politics in America has descended, check out this negative ad for the senate seat in Tennessee. Its hard to believe its *not* a parody. Its also not local: its produced directly by the Republican National Committee....talk about "entertaining"....

 

Can't we all just...get along,

Buffy

Aside from the graphic at the end of the ad, what indication do you have that this is a real ad made by the RNC? If it looks like a parody, it is because it is a parody. If I have to eat these words I will. Will you recant as well if this proves to be a hoax?

 

Bill

[Buffy]

In the 92 election Bush 41 was hammered by Bill Clinton for being a liar for having broken his word to the American people on the no tax pledge. What I found astounding about this is that the tax hike in question was part of the Democratic agenda.

And you should have, but I'll quibble that it was Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot who said this, not Bill Clinton. Clinton would have been eaten alive had he said it. What Carville crafted with his, "its the Economy, Stupid" theory was an attack on Republican policies favoring the rich over the middle class, and his platform specifically mentioned "making taxes more progressive"--i.e. increase taxes on the rich.

 

I think Bush did the right thing, and I think he was actually a better president than Reagan in certain respects. His problem was simply timing, with Pat and Ross haranguing him not just in the primaries but all the way up to the election about not being sufficiently conservative was his doom. Interestingly, exactly the same thing has been happening to the Democrats since 2000, with the left wing of the party killing off the best candidates as insufficiently liberal. You want to know why Hillary probably won't be nominated? She's too much of an "appeaser" according to many in the party. Feh.

 

The center is where the majority is,

Buffy

[Buffy]

Aside from the graphic at the end of the ad, what indication do you have that this is a real ad made by the RNC? If it looks like a parody, it is because it is a parody. If I have to eat these words I will. Will you recant as well if this proves to be a hoax?

I didn't believe it either, until I talked to a friend of mine in Nashville who's seen it on TV. And she's a rabid conservative too....

 

Believe it or nuts,

Buffy

[TheBigDog]

Aside from the graphic at the end of the ad, what indication do you have that this is a real ad made by the RNC? If it looks like a parody, it is because it is a parody. If I have to eat these words I will. Will you recant as well if this proves to be a hoax?

 

Bill

Buffy, the worst part about eating crow is the damn feathers. They don't seem to wash down no matter how much you drink. :phones:

 

The ad is real, and certainly does not reflect the character I would want from a campaign ad from any major party. I am interested to see how the parties deal with it over the next days. This, unfortunatly, is the ugly result of good intentioned but ill conceived campaign finance reform that distances candiates from the messages in support of them.

 

Bill

[Buffy]

Buffy, the worst part about eating crow is the damn feathers. They don't seem to wash down no matter how much you drink. :phones:

To say it publicly, I don't think there's any need for BD to consume any crow. He most certainly does not deserve it.

 

For those of you who are still in doubt about the veracity of this ad, here's the news story about it where the Republican candidate is requesting the RNC to pull the ad:

 

Corker wants RNC's anti-Ford ad pulled

 

And gosh, if you need a higher-res link to the video, here it is....

 

In awe of chutzpah,

Buffy

[TheFaithfulStone]

Dear. God.

 

TFS