Reply
Sat 22 Sep, 2007 12:18 pm
when american politics became a sporting event where the object was for your team to win... period....instead of being about selecting representatives that would run the country for the benefit of it's citizens?
I realize that it's been perfected since 1999 when **** head began seeking the presidency in earnest.... but when did we pass the fail safe point that has led s to where we are today?
And at one point did we, the American people empower these assholes and hand them full rein to do as they please?
And short of armed insurrection, which I do not suggest or condone, can this situation be repaired?
Gunga and friends let me say that I disagree the hanging, drawing and quartering of the Clintons in the public square is the answer. I realize you do.
Thoughts?
Yes... the watershed "moment" was the election of 1796... the campaign between John Adams and the Federalists and Thomas Jefferson as the Democratic-Republicans.
The damn Federalist won... but we all know they were High Falooting wealthy scumbags who really wanted a Monarchy.
If you read the old campaigns (which were far more personal and downright nasty)... you will see that things have never been better than they are now.
ebrown_p wrote:Yes... the watershed "moment" was the election of 1796... the campaign between John Adams and the Federalists and Thomas Jefferson as the Democratic-Republicans.
The damn Federalist won... but we all know they were High Falooting wealthy scumbags who really wanted a Monarchy.
If you read the old campaigns (which were far more personal and downright nasty)... you will see that things have never been better than they are now.
Thank you ebrown... I'm going for a ride on my little pony now into the enchanted forest.... I really want to climb rock candy mountain this afternoon before I go to work...
Great Bear... but my curiosity sent me searching for source material (without luck)... but this analysis is interesting...
Quote:
That year supporters of John Adams accused presidential rival Thomas Jefferson of religious heterodoxy and condemned his dangerous sympathy for the revolutionary French, with all their "guillotines" and "terror." (So when Republicans this year say that the Democratic nominee "looks French," it's downright quaint by comparison.)
Jefferson's supporters did their share of sniping, too, labeling nemesis Adams a "monarchist"--a tough charge in days when monarchy was a sore subject.
Partisans then did not have the 30-second television ads, targeted direct mail, automated call centers and 24-hour cable news channels that are used today to amplify negative messages. But they used the tools they had--print materials and word-of-mouth--with a vengeance.
The prickly tone of 1796 turned even nastier and more personal, in the 1800 the race that pitted President Adams, a Federalist, against Vice President Jefferson, leader of the rival Democratic-Republicans, for the young nation's top job.
Advertisement
Adams was called everything from a fool to a criminal. Claims were made that he wanted to marry off his son to the daughter of George III, creating an American dynasty under British rule. Even Alexander Hamilton, a prominent fellow Federalist, ripped into Adams, saying his defects of character made him unfit to hold office. A furious Adams lashed back, calling Hamilton, the nation's first treasury secretary, "the greatest intriguant in the world--a man devoid of every moral principle-a bastard."
Article on Campaign ads.
Personally I am a bit disappointed that modern Democrats are such wusses.