The vulgarization of American politics

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ghrit, Feb 13, 2016.

  1. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    I would love to cite the source of this, but I got it without a citation. Herewith, anyway.

    While delivering remarks in New Hampshire this week critical of Ted Cruz’s thoughtful position on the use of waterboarding, one of Donald Trump’s supporters yelled out to him that this made Cruz a word not fit for pages of this site. Not wanting such a crude, but biting, criticism of his opponent to be left hanging in the air, Trump did what we all could have guessed he would do -- stop his speech, chuckle, and then repeat it into the microphone to make sure every person and media representative present heard.

    To say that Trump’s entry into the 2016 presidential has “changed the face “of the nomination process would be a gross understatement, with“gross”being the operative word. While outsider voices, such as Rand Paul’s, intelligently articulated topics often ignored among today’s Republicans, Trump has done nothing to elevate the level of discourse in this year’s nomination fight. Instead, Trump’s use of vulgar language, crass insults, personal attacks, and snide comments has turned what should have been an ongoing conversation about how to restore conservative values to American public policy, into little more than a chest-thumping circus about “who is the greatest.”

    The effect on voters is perceptible as well. When Trump repeated the profane insult about Cruz, gleefully shouted by one of his female supporters, the room exploded in applause and cheers; as if by debasing himself, Trump proved once again he was a “commoner” just like the rest of them, and not part of the uptight "Establishment" ruling class his billions indicate. This type of reaction to Trump’s shameful (and shameless) conduct speaks not only to the coarsening of American culture generally (seen now in the use of profanity on network television, gratuitous gross language in movies, use of the “f”-word among young people including teenage girls, etc.), but perhaps even more disturbingly, to a trend begun under Bill Clinton -- that of lowering the standards for, and expectations about, the office of the President of the United States.

    It is the vulgarization of American politics.

    The GOP’s open embrace of Trump, much like the Left’s continued infatuation with Bill Clinton, is clear evidence that many, if not perhaps most, Americans no longer hold the Office of President as above the lowest common denominator. These men do not represent the very best of American ideals, but closer to the very worst; that it is okay to engage in perverted sex acts in the Oval Office, it’s okay to lie, it’s okay to insult people individually and as a group, it’s okay to brag about buying-off politicians for personal gain, it’s okay to use vulgar language in public because -- to these people and to their enablers among the voting population and the media -- such conduct sells and, after all, simply reflects the “people’s culture.”

    Vulgarity and baseness has become the New Normal.

    In our desire to shed any semblance of Establishment elitism from the ranks of the GOP, we have forgotten that it is okay to look up to our leaders, rather than to our sides, or worse, beneath us. We should be inspired by leaders who we regard as the elite among us –those who reflect the very best of our nation in intelligence, bravery, decency, leadership, and strength.

    Today, we have begun to measure our future leaders not by traditional standards, such as conservative voting records, a genuine knowledge and respect for the Constitution, and skills to diplomatically bring all parties to the table to find solutions to America’s problems; but, instead, simply by whom we could share a beer and a dirty joke with. Yet, how would this standard apply to America’s greatest historical leaders? Imagine the rebuke by George Washington were one of his officers or cabinet officials to utter a vulgar joke over dinner with the nation's Commander in Chief. Ronald Reagan refused to take off his suit jacket in the Oval Office as a sign of genuine respect for the Office he held. We know what Bill Clinton did in that same office; imagine the baseness with which "President" Trump would treat it.

    Being against the Establishment means opposing political leaders who are motivated only by furthering their personal interests, and not those of their constituents. It does not mean opposing any one and anything that appears to be “above” the common man. America does not need a peasant as king to become great again, but rather a leader who understands the traditions and philosophic underpinnings of our great nation, and who has the courage to restore them in public policy. Instead of looking to who can lower themselves the most to the “people’s level, “we should look for those who can elevate the people the highest. But, to do that, they must first hold themselves to that level of excellence.

    Otherwise, as political satirist H.L. Mencken once noted, “the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” Unfortunately, we seem to be well on our way to that “great and glorious day" foreseen by one of the 20th Century's great political sages.
    TXKajun, stg58, chelloveck and 4 others like this.
  2. Mindgrinder

    Mindgrinder Karma Pirate Ninja|RIP 12-25-2017

    Motomom34 likes this.
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Thanx, mg.
    Mindgrinder and Motomom34 like this.
  4. Bandit99

    Bandit99 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+

    My opinion...

    First, historically there are many, too many incidents where Presidents were involved in unscrupulous behavior and acts of immorality. Many kept mistresses and some even invited them to the White House for romantic rendezvous (J.FK.) others were more discreet (F.D.R)... Others were drunks (Grant) others were... This goes down through history from the beginning.

    Most of our Presidents, if not all, were from a wealthy backgrounds and, as such, had the best education possible...but even the rich, powerful and well educated curse...and do it well. General Patton was famous for it and Americans loved him and he came from a very rich and powerful family.
    My point here is Presidents are people too and have the same weaknesses that we all do and even though they are rich, educated and hold a powerful office - they are but people. A president puts his pants on the same way as you are I. Personally, I never cared how many young naïve women President Clinton had affairs with; that was between him and his wife. But, I do care that he lied to the nation about it and I consider that to be inexcusable.

    Second, George Washington was another era. A time which would not tolerate a curse in public but tolerated slavery. A time which would not tolerate a woman to vote or to show her ankles but tolerated - well - many distasteful things. My point is comparing the Washington era with now is comparing apples to oranges. You cannot.

    Julius Caesar (who was a renown womanizer) knew that true power lies not in the hands of the few rich nobles but in the masses, the poor, called 'Plebs'. He connected with them, courted them, spoke their language so they would know he was with them, for them. Trump does this well and it doesn't bother me one bit if he says a vulgar word now and then (I do too) but it does bother me that Cruz has connections to Wall Street via his wife; this I consider to be a topic of interest, a serious one.

    I think this article is a low blow to discredit Trump for what they all do - they curse - just like you and me. And, I would say to the author, Bob Barr, report on something of value, on the issues. But, perhaps Mr. Barr doesn't know that politics is a dirty, vulgar business and more so during election years. Perhaps he shouldn't be reporting on it... I wonder if he curses upon occasion.

    PS. This is not to say that I condone the use of foul language. It's to say that it is a reality. For example, my speech is tempered by who I am with, in public or private, and the activity I am engaged. An election rally where emotions are high and supporters are filled with excitement...yes, you will without a doubt hear bad language.
    Dont, Mountainman, kellory and 3 others like this.
  5. Legion489

    Legion489 Rev. 2:19 Banned

    That was pretty funny. American politics (as is politics the world over) is vile, vulgar and vicious. Look at the smears of Jefferson, Adams and others of that time. Stuff that would have been too disgusting for anything short of Larry Flint and Hustler. And they were published in the papers of the time. Sure Trump repeated the "P-ssy" word (in deference to the lily livered and well, p-ssys, here), but then isn't Trump what America NEEDS? Either Trump of Hillary anyway, possibly Bernie. All the rest are just the same old same old political hacks that have run us into the ground already. A breath of fresh air may smell odd to those who's head has been stuck up their... er... rumps so long that a cess pool smells like roses to them. If Obummer was a vile and vicious with America's enemies as he is with "bitter clingers", Putin would be wee-weeing in his pants instead of laughing at us. But of course Obummer is a demonrat and they aren't going to do that, at least as long as Moochel is on vacation on the taxpayers dime.

    "The GOP’s open embrace of Trump"? Now I know the guy is a fool. The GOP establishment has bet heavily on Jeb Bush the loser. Jeb spends millions on fliers, TV, radio, etc. and comes in last in every debate, vote, caucus or poll, and STILL gets money and support from the GOP ring leaders. Trump on the other hand takes NO money from anyone and is winning. Obviously Trump has hit nerve that needed scratched.

    "'Otherwise, as political satirist H.L. Mencken once noted, “the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” Unfortunately, we seem to be well on our way to that “great and glorious day" foreseen by one of the 20th Century's great political sages.' Hmmmm.... has any one forgot LBJ? Klinton? Pinko Peanut Carter? Obummer? All demonrats and dumber than rocks I might add, as if adding "dumber than rocks" to "demonrat" wasn't redundant enough. As to womanizers, how about LB Johnson? J.F. Kennedy? Klinton? All, again, demonrats and obvious about it and even bragged about it. I might note that Monica L will NOT vote for Klinton as the last time a Klinton was pres it left a bad taste in her mouth. LB Johnson liked to wizz (I hope that is not too harsh a word for the weak willed to read) in public and enjoyed getting caught at it as well. Klinton couldn't tell the truth (EITHER of them) and had sex in the Oval Office (or orifice) and didn't know "what the meaning of is is", lied to Congress and the American People and both of them had everyone who worked for them, with them, or around them die. Remember Vince Foster and Ron Brown of the dozens and dozens of reports and guards who died? And TRUMP is the vile one?! Please.
    Garand69, Mountainman and Bandit99 like this.
  6. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    Unlike dictatorships; democracies, and in particular republican style democracies, politicians must rely on persuasion to get into the game of political office, let alone getting the work of that political office done. Those who are more effective at persuasion tend to get elected, and getting their vision of government implemented. Being successfully elected, (and staying elected) relies on appealing mainly, (but not exclusively) to the hoi polloi *.

    DT is a shrewd judge of people, and he has judged that dropping the odd F bomb, and acting like Archie Bunker etc. won't damage his relationship with the majority of those whom he feels will vote him into office (whom also swear and cuss, and act like Archie Bunker. DT has carefully crafted an image of himself as a tough, no nonsense guy, who will charge, and break through any obstacle in his way to achieving whatever goal he sets his mind to. DT's behaviour and image is but a reflection of the electorate he is trying to dance with, on his way to the White House. Expect more of the same along the way to the presidential election later in the year. It will get foul and bloody.


    Donald is a privileged member of the American establishment....he's just presenting himself as Moe, Larry, and Curley all rolled into one, so that the public can identify with him identifying with his public. All smoke and mirrors of course.
  7. Bandit99

    Bandit99 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+

    You are saying that DT is, in truth, an insider, and most that is coming out of his mouth are words that the masses desire to hear...but basically lies.
    It is possible given his financial status which can and does make him one of the elites. But, he has not received any monies (that I have heard of) from any sources which I feel sure the press would have jumped on...I am not saying that this proves he is not a hoax just making that point. I suppose it is possible, I hope not but possible.... I hope you're wrong. - Rick
  8. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    I personally think Donald Trump is all the vulgar words he uses about others. That aside, I view all the 'buzz' about Trump is no different from all the hype about Obama. Don't trust what someone is saying when they're running for office, instead pay attention to what they have done when they're not.
    kellory and chelloveck like this.
  9. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey Site Supporter+++

    NEVER trust a "charismatic" political figure!! It never turns out well for "We The People".. Oh, Wait.. That's all politicians isn't it??
  10. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    I don't know about ALL politicians, some I wonder how they got elected in the first place.
    Legion489 likes this.
  11. Garand69

    Garand69 Monkey+ Site Supporter+

    American Poltics has been a mudslinging vulgarity contest since day one. The more "Eloquent" politicians simply have their James Carvel's do the dirty work, but the trash talk is still flying around. Where did refusing to get ugly get McCain and Romney??
  12. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    I doubt that casting aside their gentleman Jim personas would have been of any advantage to McCain and Romney. McCain was dragging the boat anchor by the name of Palin, and as to Mittens, well, who heard of an LDS POTUS?
  13. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Who ever heard of a rock chucker POTUS before JFK? That is the most feeble argument you've EVER presented.
    kellory, Tikka and Garand69 like this.
  14. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    I'm not arguing that Mittens should not have been, nor could not have been POTUS, because it would would have made him the first LDS POTUS. I am just suggesting that the electorate wasn't ready at that time to have a president who believed in, and practiced the doctrines of the LDS church. Though for some unaccountable reason, the US electorate seemed to prefer to elect a "Muslim" to the office...
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2016
    Legion489 likes this.
  15. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    0bama attended Rev. Wright's racist church. If you are correct and he is a Muslim; he must have attended for the racist dialogue..
  16. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    Not necessarily so.....I may enter a brothel without being there for the sex.....I may be there purely to distribute Gideon Bibles with a view to saving the immortal souls of sex workers and clients, (who are otherwise engaged in perfectly legal commercial transactions). But, given the number of evangelical pastors found as brothel customers over the years, I have to admit, it probably doesn't look good.
  17. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    True, it doesn't look good.

    "The results are sometimes comical, as people whose names resembled the famous -- and infamous -- forced the West Wing to wave reporters away from the juiciest of apparent visits. Did '60s radical William Ayers, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and filmmaker Michael Moore all visit the Obama White House, as the list indicated? Aides were quick to say: It wasn't that Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright or Michael Moore, although more details about the identities of the real visitors were not provided."
    White House releases six-month log of visitors

    Obviously 0bama's aides were quick to say.. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary