when did politics and politicians become so self serving?

[trappnman]

politics used to be about service

JFK asked us to not ask what our country can do for them, but what they could do for the country.

politicians used to be experts in the fine art of compromise, and negotiations-

When and how did it all change? when did getting elected, lead to not serving the voters, but immediately become a campaign to get re-elected, to where that becomes paramount and running the govt for the majority of people becomes not even secondary, but non existent? and not on issues but on fear and distortions

and this isn't a party issue

its an attitude issue, or a human issue, or I don't know what the hell type of issue, but its not a party issue per se.

I'd welcome a conversation/discussion on why we are where we are, and what can be done to get off that

used to be dems and reps were pretty much the same- with dems favoring working people, reps favoring business- but not the 90% majority like now on each side- but 60%- so everyone was, if not happy at least not unhappy.

[bblwi]

As we become more independent and self centered as a society we become much less community based or service orientated. We become much more selfish and want or need to carve out for us what we want. We don't believe there is more pie we are taking the position there is limited wealth and opportunity and I want my slice and more if available. We don't want to spend money on investing in future generations and we do so very grudgingly and also very judgmentally. For some reason the very conservative and wealthy along with their media talking heads have convinced the average citizen that all the problems in the US are due to the 40-50 million who are on assistance and other governmental and charitable funding. These persons represent about 4-5% of the income and wealth of the nation and all they spend goes through the economy yet we feel they are the root of all our problems and are evil. Sure we would prefer to not have that much assistance to those that won't or can't work but to believe they are the root of all of our problems be it taxes, debt, etc. etc. is really not a true picture of the US and our economic situation. So is it any wonder why politicians who really are the "tip of the iceberg" of our society don't want or feel they need the same things? They need to carve out their slice to preserve their job, power and opportunity to get "free money" from those who want to be able to lobby them.
As our moderates and independent voters swing left to right based on perception and media the real change may only come from electing a group of politicians that will agree to work with each other even if they don't always agree. I am coming to believe that much of this may have to come from governors as there is too much power in partisan positions in Congress to move away from current held beliefs and wants in Congress. Obama may well have been the first US president since TR to use the office of president to move our political focus or center but he was either unable or unwilling to work at accomplishing that in his two terms. With so few Dem's now in strong support of the WH this may well be the time for his administration to work on Centralist type issues. I don't know if there is enough political capital left in the administration to move government much at all. There certainly will not be much if any money in working from the middle so it needs a lot of other energy and there may not be enough there to do much if anything.

Bryce

[trappincoyotes39]

$$$$$$$$$$$

Until we control that things will stay the same, too much $$$$$ to be made in DC. How many of these people ever come back to their home states after serving more than a few terms? They all say they are working for the people of their states example : Tom Daschle was voted out 10 years ago and still lives in DC making more money, EGO, power and control consumes many of them period. Not what is good or not...........

[RShaw]

You can say it is the money, the power, the taxes, or a hundred different issues. All of these have a solution. They could all be fixed.

The real problem with America, the one that can't be easily fixed is very easy to see once you step back and take a look at the big picture......... Ethics and morality are obsolete here in the US. There is no longer any shame.

[trappnman]

how so RShaw?

[trappincoyotes39]

Rshaw you have a good point on that, Becuase of power and money and back scratching that goes on, they have no shame because they have to much control and power where the fattened hog gets slaughtered and who gets what pieace of that hog..........

When people feel threatened they try to being up topics like religion and such, frankly I think many of these people should have a moral compass that can be found through faith and hope.......... if people have both of these qualities they have a lot IMO.

Yes I know there are some who have one or the other and still their moral compass is off true north, but not the norm.

[bblwi]

It is difficult to feel shame if you don't know what right is. I don't blame the politicians they are for the most part doing exactly what those of us who elected them wanted us to do. I don't know many Dem's who are asking for significant shrinkage of government nor to I know any GOP politicians who find it hard to not vilify the unworthy poor who vote democratic.


Bryce

[RShaw]

Moral Compass

Do no harm.
Accept responsibility for personal actions and for the consequences of these actions.
Accept a duty of care.
Affirm the individual's right to self-determination.
Put the truth first.
Never use a person as merely an unconsenting means to an end, even if the end benefits others.
Be honest.
Honour agreements.
Conduct relationships with integrity.
Leave a positive legacy to future generations.

Your moral compass can only point you in the right direction. It cannot make you go there.

[mmwb (Andrew Parker)]

Overall, I think that much of what we see in DC is a reflection of the priorities and values of many of the voters, but not all. I believe some contributing factors are:

1. A sense of hopelessness among voters (a mind set that this is what we have to settle for--so they do),

2. Dualistic or black and white thinking. Many are very focused on key 'deal breaker' issues when they vote. This makes it easy for politicians to campaign to the issues with the largest followings rather than have to run on platforms supporting compromise and collaboration,

3. Then there is the severe polarization. An inability or unwillingness to see, to some degree understand, and to validate some portion of opposing views is becoming almost non-existent. This is a problem society wide and politicians simply reflect it. I think the severe polarization, strongly supported by gross over generalization (read threads on this site relative to religion, health care, etc. for examples) is severely hindering the meeting on common ground for the benefit of everyone, as opposed to the benefit of the party or those whose sole dedication is to have things done only the way they want them. An unwillingness to compromise is much bigger than political parties, and

4. As stated above, there appears to be a broad lack of moral foundation--adherence to basic ethical principles. This too is much bigger than politics.

[mostinterestingmanintheworld]

I've given a lot of thought about compromise as it pertains to trapping.

Compromise implies that both sides have something to give.

The antis don't have anything to give so is compromise possible?

I think not.

I've made it a policy that when ever some one asks me to "compromise" I ask for something from them. It's been working well.

[bblwi]

Compromise does not imply that all things have a middle. The antis have nothing to offer when it comes to setting a trap or not setting but there can be considerable discussion with several groups regarding the "rights" of non human species and the equality that they should have or not have and if that is handled correctly or scientifically then the trap setting debate won't happen.
Livestock or animal agriculture is another one. Animal welfare is a very valid item to discuss with all stakeholders and compromise on housing and handling is appropriate, but determining if animals should be used for consumption and use is one that to me is not a valid discussion as to yes or no. We have far too many millions of acres that we leave in grass because farming it would be too devastating to the environment and cattle and sheep etc. allow profitable conservation use of the landscape.

Bryce

[PamIsMe]

I don't know if I entirely agree with the morality compass thing. It's just a catch phrase. I think what's gone by the wayside for a lot of people is plain old empathy and respect. When I see a cartoon of our President and his family depicted as monkeys sitting in a tree, and being called all kinds of names (obummer for one mild example) I'm disgusted with the person who writes it. Some people have become so nasty, it's just uncalled for. I think most of it is due to the fabrications and denigration that goes on when big money is so heavily involved in politics,on both sides. Fear mongering is paramount to getting elected these days, and there are too many one issue voters.

We live in an age where research is easy on the internet, yet people take what they read and hear at face value and don't bother to look up the facts, and even if they do they don't believe them because of some rag they regularly read or radio guy they listen to. I think it's gotten worse the past few years and I truly blame the rise of the Tea Party for causing a lot of the self centeredness lately. Everything is I, Me, and Mine, and I'm keeping it. The economy tanked and so many people are in dire trouble and the only advice they get by the most self-righteous is to pull themselves up and be responsible for their own actions. Well, not everything is an individual's fault and IMHO giving them a helping hand is a better way than dismissing them with "you got yourself into now get yourself out". I volunteer at the local food pantry and in spite of what the constitution says, all men are not created equal. We don't all have the same advantages in life, or intelligence for that matter.

IMHO the SCOTUS did us all a terrible disserve when they ruled that corporations are people. No political ad should ever go out without it saying "This ad has been endorsed by (name of the candidate) on it. I think many of them would be too embarrassed by the content of some of the ads to admit they did endorse it. We had a good example in WI when it was published that Mary Burke got fired by her own company, and Walker said "Well, I heard the same rumors awhile back, but I decided not to pass them on." That's a true politician.
Enough ranting lol

So to answer the question, I believe it's Get the big money out of politics so someone who can say what they really believe can run for office without owing their election to some underhanded dealings by corporations or billionaires.

Does anyone else remember back in the day when TV stations had to allow equal airtime for candidates? What ever happened to that policy I wonder?

Cheers,
Pam

[trappincoyotes39]

Pam a corporation is an association of individuals , so they got that correct without people you can't have a corporation. SCOTUS got that right as you cannot single out a group of people with showing discrimination.

Pam you can't have empathy or respect without morals...........

[bblwi]

empathy is understanding not sympathy. Morals is a very subjective term and can be extremely biased as well. When we have conservative Christians coming up to moderate Christians stating moderates are not moral then that is where I draw the line on how Christian Morals are drawn. We have created a society and culture where we don't have to interact with groups we don't like and thus empathy is limited and perception becomes reality and we have highly paid private sector and government elected persons advocating for the lack of empathy because it gives them power and revenue, yet they believe they have the moral high road.

Bryce

[PamIsMe]

"Pam a corporation is an association of individuals;;"

So let the individual people stand up and be honest about what they believe in. Sanctioning the forming a corporation solely for the purpose of donating huge amounts of money without having to reveal the source, and telling lies anonymously, to me is what is immoral.

Pam

[bobbrennan1]

Pam your making it sound one sided by blaming the tea party they all do.garbage ALL of them it's sickening! Just look at the leaders of every party master manipulaters every one!

[PamIsMe]

I agree Bob, all of them are in the same boat. But IMHO in recent elections (especially in WI) the Tea Party/conservatives have really been the nastiest.

Cheers,
Pam

[bobbrennan1]

It's not just the elections it's daily the leadership stinks all concerned it's their game after the elections, they have no fear or respect!

[trappnman]

some interesting viewpoints-

I'm not sure if its a decay of moral values- at least, not as a nation

in many ways, I'd link the problem to the Catch 22 aspect of the 24/7 news. Internet, cameras on every phone, etc

Heard a piece by Rush. and echoed by some Rep top guns (and I bring this up not because of the party, but the point) is that they shouldn't do anything for the next 2 years, and instead put in al ltheir effort to work towards a 2016 presidential candidate-

and thats the crux of it, is it not? Politicians afraid to do anything, for fear of either primary or election fallout and possible defeat

similar to no one wanting to post on forums, because no matter what they say, 20 people will jump in to bust their balls.

so are the politicians, just wha

[mmwb (Andrew Parker)]

I think you are right on that point Steve. I'm pretty sure doing nothing will not promote confidence...