Reading comment feedback from readers about news articles on the Internet, is half the entertainment in reading the news. However, in recent times, comments blame the current governmental entity or the former. The news article may not even pertain to a political issue yet the responses are negative in either context.
There are opinions that news reports from a subjective angle, and it has lost its objectivity. When it comes to television news or the newspaper, yes, there is a tendency for a specific slant one way or another. Online news is slanted mostly due to the freedom readers are enlisted to comment. Of course, a viewpoint will be slanted liberal or conservative based on the audience response.
The viewpoint of people nowadays is anger, frustration, and condemnation for the opposite party-anti-government. The depth of these emotions runs deeper and longer than just two years of a president and a struggling economy. The blame game has been occurring for decades. The Republican Party president is voted in; the party is blamed for what is wrong in America. Then the Democratic president is voted in, and then they are blamed. It is a vicious cycle of voting for the opposite every term because the destruction of the other. The problems aren’t being solved. The problems are only growing. One reason could be that individuals give too much power to the government. There is a history behind the power wielded.
The origination of the parties is important to note. The Democratic Party began as the Democratic-Republican Party. This party preferred the rights of the states and allegiance to the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were the founders. There was opposition to the wealthy and its interests and the national bank. After the election of 1800, the Democratic-Republican Party rose to power. It was after the War of 1812, the party’s main rival, the Federalist Party broke up. The choice of successor to President James Monroe, caused a dispute for the Democratic-Republicans, and the group which supported many of the old Jeffersonian principles became the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party was then led by Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren.
The Democrats historical ideologies favored farmers, laborers, labor unions, and religious and ethnic minorities. The party has resisted unregulated business and finance while favoring progressive income taxes.
In the 21st century, Democratic ideals include: social freedom, affirmative action, a balanced budget, and a free enterprise system mixed with government intervention. The “Third Way” mindset means that the government should influence an alleviation of poverty and social injustices. ((http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)
Meanwhile, the Republican Party was founded in northern states in 1854 by anti-slavery activists, modernizers, ex-Whigs and ex-Free Soilers. The Party soon became the prime disputant to the Democratic Party. It first came to power in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency and oversaw the American Civil War and Reconstruction.
The Republican party favored business, hard money or the gold standard, high tariffs for economic growth, high wages and high profits, and generous pensions for Union veterans. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)
Democrat and Republican have been the presidents since 1852. And the heat between the parties has been intense for decades.
The reason for such a strong rally behind parties and antagonism towards the other is because the ideals change so often. There is also contradiction in the viewpoints each party has. For example, a Republican ideology is to allow personal responsibility for the accountability of individuals’ actions instead of the government needed to protect people as the Democrat Party believes. However, on October 26, 2001, George W. Bush, signed the USA Patriot Act. This bill portrays law enforcement having fewer restrictions regarding security measures. This is the government becoming involved in the people’s affairs, which is not a projected ideal of the Party. Habeas corpus was also thrown out in 2001. This means, a person can be sent to jail without the discrepancy of a trial and judge. From this, gives the government free reign to push influence on society.
Barack Obama followed suit with his own Democratic contradictions. The first is relating to taxes. Obama aimed to remove taxes on capital for the reason that the economy needed the stimulus, then to increase taxes on other capital since it won’t hurt growth. It was a political move, which makes little sense even when writing it. Obama’s goal, earlier this year, wanted rates on taxes to rise dramatically for small business revenues, dividends, capital gains, and high-income earners. The question is, what effect exactly did Obama want for taxes?
At hand, what the nation is dealing with pertaining to the political parties and the bipartisan command, are the same agenda. The majority of voters are considered moderate; this means both liberal and conservative. The policies, goals, and trajectories of the candidates’ running will steer towards favorable outlines for its constituents based on its party “ideals”. However, once the political race moves along, lobbyists, the media, the candidates’ team, and voters affect the path of the policies. It is also common, for an individual to change their mind. It doesn’t necessarily mean there is a contradiction or there is dishonesty. It could plainly be, the initial idea worked on paper, and then as it came into fruition, it didn’t.
The government is a lot like a corporation. The President is appointed the Chief Executive Officer of the country. There is a Board of Directors, which could be considered Congress. Then there are the employees i.e. the voters. A CEO’s obligation is to problem-solve, make decisions, and act as a face of the firm. These are common behaviors from the President. Just as a CEO may not think subjectively the decision is the best for them, it is the best decision for the corporation as a whole. Ultimately, the President may follow this similar pretense.
There is the aspect of mistrust with the constituents, which is a far greater issue. It is this mistrust and anger, which has been causing such disharmony within the United States. It isn’t easy to be a country’s leader. No matter what country. One group wants government incentives and involvement, the other group wants more defense and better tax breaks. The existence of a bipartisan party is a double edged sword. It is a compromise between two separate, good ideals, however, the maintenance for the ideals to be put forth as well as the rigidity in presidential options, is wearing thin. Even when there are other candidates who possess the capability and power to take the nation in another direction, they don’t receive enough votes and support to make it a reality. Worse, is the candidate running as a Democrat or Republican, they lose the primaries, then they run under another party umbrella. This is a contradiction at its best.
The government is running amuck attempting to please those around them compared to those under them. It has been the struggle for almost a century. The blame debate rages endlessly.
There is a debate about who is wrong and who is right because people want a scapegoat. Because there isn’t anyone specific or factual who complicated the nation’s issues, people are blaming the past and present. Next, will be the blaming of the future president. People want a solution; people want change-sincere change. It won’t come in the matter of the next election. The bipartisan party is too tangled and inflexible in its ways to induce true change in the country’s problems.
The solution: take a chance and vote for the underdog. Vote for the ideals you believe in. If it is Libertarian, Green, or the Constitution party, vote for the candidate. There are currently six political parties registered with the Federal Election Commission, as of the 2008 election, to choose from. In fact, if you are over the age of thirty-five with financial backing, you should run for President yourself. If the next President isn’t changing anything, changing things for the worst or changing his mind, it should no longer matter who you vote for. As a society, we are giving too much power, our power, to the government in charge. No one is to blame. There is something to be said about accountability. There is something to be said about a blameless America.