Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Politics Permanently Broken?

   
Politics Permanently Broken?

I had this discussion with a few co workers on the way to work this morning after reading CNN's republican primary. Obviously this discussion is regarding American politics though I wouldn't be surprised if it applied to those of you across the pond as well.

The question was whether we have finally hit the 'point of no return' when it comes to the American politic system, where it is clear that it just is never going to work again as intended. This was sparked by the fact that Rick Santorum is neck and neck with Mitt Romney in the Republican race.

We're talking about a guy here that is quoted on record as supporting what amounts to Biblical law. Pretty much as far right as you can get without becoming a parody of a real human being (ala Colbert). So what this means is that a large portion of the population think that this guy, clearly a no compromise, hyper-conservative candidate, should run a country.

If this is what is now considered 'electable', how do we ever expect to see compromising, efficient, and a unified government working together again? We've already seen that there is almost no desire to work together in our House and Senate... if the new breed of electable candidates are the ones with the most extreme views how are we going to continue to have a country?

The only ideas we could generally come up with didn't end well. Mostly with revolution, collapse and restructuring, or other extremely radical scenarios that require an immediate and painful change in the way we govern and elect.

vote democrat. When the Republicans start becoming unelectable they will either change their approach or new parties will start to seriously challenge them. this *us* how it was intended to work, with responsibility being in the hands of the voters, not the political machinery.

Except there is no indication that the democratic party is any more reasonable. They're just the incumbents at this point so there's no need to have a dog fight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madadh View Post
We're talking about a guy here that is quoted on record as supporting what amounts to Biblical law.
What quote would that be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madadh View Post
The question was whether we have finally hit the 'point of no return' when it comes to the American politic system, where it is clear that it just is never going to work again as intended. This was sparked by the fact that Rick Santorum is neck and neck with Mitt Romney in the Republican race.

We're talking about a guy here that is quoted on record as supporting what amounts to Biblical law. Pretty much as far right as you can get without becoming a parody of a real human being (ala Colbert). So what this means is that a large portion of the population think that this guy, clearly a no compromise, hyper-conservative candidate, should run a country.
As person living at the verges of the EU I don't feel proficient to asses the above mentioned politician so I would take that what you said about him for granted. However, there is one thing in your post that raises my question. Why you claim that's a problem of political system? Does he represent views of his electorate? If yes, and if these views are indeed a problem, isn't it problem more with society from which by democratic process representatives are selected?

Ben: here is the original article where it was quoted from one of his campaign trail speeches on CNN Cnn Link

And a more full version: Random website. There's quite a few links to that one which is from a radio show, but similar speech.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TW Teczka View Post
As person living at the verges of the EU I don't feel proficient to asses the above mentioned politician so I would take that what you said about him for granted. However, there is one thing in your post that raises my question. Why you claim that's a problem of political system? Does he represent views of his electorate? If yes, and if these views are indeed a problem, isn't it problem more with society from which by democratic process representatives are selected?
It's not a problem with him representing an electorate but more a problem with the fact that when one is on such an extreme from the 'middle', how exactly is said person ever supposed to make a workable government with someone that holds the opposite views? These candidates are generally of the 'no compromise, veto, fillibuster' side of governing: IE bully the opposition into submission. We've already seen some of that this year with the budget talks. That's no way to run a government.

That was a pretty brief quote and devoid of context but I don't like Santorum for this reason anyway. Obama had much to say about how his views on religion influenced his policies too in the prayer breakfast last week. Politicians dictating their beliefs to people whether it's influenced by their religion or because they think everyone deserves contraception without having to shell out a few bucks for condoms are equally bad. People can decide their own beliefs, they don't need the governments help.

Personally I wish they'd both stay out of it. Let the religions do what they want as long as it doesn't violate other people's freedoms and separate church and state.

Well I don't think you need much context there, I'm pretty sure 'civil law should comport to gods law' isn't something that needs context. The point is someone with THAT sort of viewpoint? How is he supposed to work with the left, or even the moderates who do still believe in separation of church and state?

I'm not a fan of Obama either (or really any one in politics at this point) but we seem to get more extreme with every election. It's getting to the point where I'm wondering if our eventual future is the dissolution of the United States as an all encompassing super power. If people are so diametrically opposed to what they want in a government and leadership, how long can we keep going on the same path?

I don't want to go out on a limb trying to defend him here because I didn't like him for years now for his staunch social conservative position (I'm fiscal, small government conservative) but I could imagine some type of a "laws should reflect the values of the country and our values have always been based off..." etc type statement which is a world of difference apart from wanting a theocracy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ben View Post
That was a pretty brief quote and devoid of context but I don't like Santorum for this reason anyway. Obama had much to say about how his views on religion influenced his policies too in the prayer breakfast last week. Politicians dictating their beliefs to people whether it's influenced by their religion or because they think everyone deserves contraception without having to shell out a few bucks for condoms are equally bad. People can decide their own beliefs, they don't need the governments help.

Personally I wish they'd both stay out of it. Let the religions do what they want as long as it doesn't violate other people's freedoms and separate church and state.
"Our civil laws have to comport with a higher law: God's law."
"We have civil laws, but our civil laws have to comport with the higher law."
"...[N]ot any god (but) the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."
"We have Judeo-Christian values that are based on biblical truth. ... And those truths don't change just because people's attitudes may change."

And those are just from the CNN article; I've heard many similar statements during Republican debates and interviews with Mr. Santorum. I'd say he's pretty open about wanting to establish religious Christian beliefs as the basis for US civil and criminal law.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status