Hyper partisanship: a Downward Spiral

By Justin A. Chick

Since the advent of the United States and its application by our founding fathers, the party system of Democracy was designed to protect and represent our nation’s populace.

Unlike the Monarchy of 18th century Great Britain, the governing body of the United States was created to function in regard to the diverse ideologies prevalent throughout the colonies.  The intention was to govern via civilized debates, with each party or platform presenting their respective points of view, and then agreeing on a suitable compromise of principles to eventually implement into law.

Today, this democratic style of politics has been abused and manipulated beyond recognition.  What used to serve as an efficient source of policy making has now become an engine of personal interest, driving a wedge between Democrats and Republicans.  Congress, who has been gridlocked by political incompetence for nearly 2 years, has a current approval rating of around 15%.  This means about 85% of Americans don’t feel the government has provided reasonable solutions to problems it was designed to solve.

One of the major reasons for our country’s political inadequacies is due to a substantial lack of accountability among lawmakers.  The result is petty name-calling and finger pointing.  During the first year and a half of President Obama’s term, there was a tendency within his administration to blame the declining economy on his predecessor George W. Bush.  However true the claims may have been, they accomplished nothing politically and most likely had a negative effect on his ambitions by antagonizing Republicans before solutions were agreed upon.

Then, in 2011, the Obama Administration—Joe Biden specifically—made the remark, “Bush broke it, but we own it,” referring to the U.S. economy and attempting to take accountability for the 2 and a half years of stagnant economic growth.  It didn’t take long for conservatives to seize the opportunity to call for a public apology for previous remarks blaming Bush.

Republicans rage in Iowa debate

By James White

Another Republican debate down.  If nothing else, this one was certainly entertaining.

Tim Pawlenty found his spine and attacked Michele Bachmann.  That kitty has claws, though, and she gave just as good as she got (and looked classier doing it!)  They fought over each other’s record.  Pawlenty pointed out that Bachmann had a zero success rate while she painted him as a liberal while he was governor of Minnesota.

Rick Santorum and Ron Paul sparred over basic conservative values.  Paul constantly blew Santorum’s mind, and it showed on Santorum’s face as he looked incredulously at his opponent.  Of course, Santorum almost made Congressman Paul have an aneurysm when he began talking about the need for more military action against Iran.

Newt Gingrich fought with no one on the stage, but instead directed his rage to the mainstream media and their “gotcha questions”.  Remember, when I say “mainstream media”, this is FOX News that is hosting this debate, and by “gotcha questions” I mean questions about his record.  But everyone knows that Gingrich has trouble keeping everything he says straight.

New Hampshire Debate: Results skewed; candidate screwed

By William R. Toler

The winner of Monday night’s GOP debate hosted by CNN is, well, debatable.

CNN proclaimed former Mass. governor Mit Romney the victor. Most “experts” agree or say it was won by Minn. Congresswoman Michele Bachman. Audience applause and online polls suggest otherwise.

Although the Atlanta-based network is promoting Romney, its own online poll shows Rep. Ron Paul leading with 81 percent. Romney, Bachman and businessman Herman Cain are in a 3-way tie with five percent.

Another online poll was shut down after Paul supporters responded overwhelmingly. A poll at the Patriot Action Network website was taken down and the site blamed supporters for their blitz. That page has also been removed.

One columnist also commented that Paul won based on the applause. “I realize Paul’s supporters tend to be louder and more enthusiastic than other candidates’ and the amount of applause is hardly a scientific way to judge a debate. But to not even consider as a potential debate winner the person who was applauded more than twice as much as any other candidate strikes me as strange.”

Republican debate Round 1: And the winner is…

By James White

Last night was the first of many Republican debates, and it was worth mentioning for several reasons.

  Only five candidates showed for the event.  Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, and Gary Johnson were the ones that made the trip to Greenville, South Carolina, and most of these contenders aren’t really considered to be the “heavyweights” of the Republican party.  Most notable by their absences were Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Michelle Bachman (whose performance I was especially looking forward to!).  Another aspect of the contest was that it was hosted by Fox News, which I’m sure is a surprise to everyone that they hosted the first Republican debate.  The best feature of this debate was that it gave the opportunity for candidates to be heard that would otherwise be drowned out during other debates and news cycles.