Tuesday, February 09, 2016

US politics - contrasting views

I noticed two editorials that related this morning. First the DomPost lamenting the bizarrenness of US politics but citing Republican candidates only. Not a  Democrat in sight. (Oh, and typically the writer manages to have a crack at ACT in the process).

 American politics may seem grotesque to New Zealanders. We have reckless demagogue politicians; but we don't have anyone as bizarrely irrational as Donald Trump.
We have narrow and fanatical politicians, but no-one as bigoted or as nasty as Ted Cruz. We have ignorant and foolish politicians, but none as breathtakingly weird as Ben Carson. 

Then a piece by a very angry American taking extreme umbrage at front-running Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is not qualified to be president of the United States of America, because she doesn’t know what the United States of America are. Terry Shumaker, former U.S. ambassador to Trinidad (I wonder what that gig cost him) and current abject minion in the service of Mrs. Clinton, quotes Herself telling an audience in New Hampshire: “Service is the rent we pay for living in this great country.” There is a very old English word for people who are required to perform service as a rent for their existence, and that word is serf. Serfdom is a form of bondage.
Agree or not, at least the second writer has zest for his topic. And note he identifies himself thereby owning his thoughts unlike the DomPost editorialist.

I wonder if the US political process is considered "grotesque" simply because too many commentators in this country have become overwhelmed by political correctness allowing it too censor and comfortably numb their intellects?


Anonymous said...

In America you have two candidates who promise to continue to ignore the constitution on one side, turning America into yet another communist wasteland like Western Europe and Can/Aus/NZ --- and five candidates on the other, all of whom want to end communism in America.

That's the real difference, and that's why the politics are "vibrant" - they are real!

Whereas in NZ in particular, you have six or seven parties distinguished mostly by the cars that they drive. With no actual policies differences whatsoever between Greens & ACT let alone anyone else in the middle, it's no surprise NZ politics are rather anodyne..

Brendan McNeill said...

Hi Lindsay

I think it runs much deeper than political correctness in NZ.

America is still populated by tens if not hundreds of millions of people who as Obama so politely put it ‘cling to God and guns’. It’s a nation where faith in God is not considered to be on the outer fringes of polite society, but entirely mainstream.

That’s why all of the Republican candidates, with the possible exception of ‘the Donald’ take their Christian faith seriously and unashamedly. In the eyes of the Dom editorial writer, this makes Princeton University graduate and former lawyer Ted Cruz both ‘bigoted and nasty’ and the former Surgeon Carson ‘breathtakingly weird’.

It’s easy for a ‘no name’ editorialist to throw unsubstantiated and derogatory remarks at these candidates. What I wonder have they ever accomplished, and are they doing anything more than revealing their own personal bias?

Is it any wonder people have abandoned the MSM?

JC said...

Wow.. what an own goal by the writer(s).. boorish, ignorant and plain dumb, I could write several pages of examples arising from it.

A couple of examples..

On religion lets just change Americans to Muslims, would the writer describe NZ Muslims with words like madness, fury, bizarrely pious, dishonest, nasty etc? If not why not given the much greater adherence to religion than in the US?

And wealth.. if money is such a determinant how come Jeb! Bush has easily the best funded campaign and one of the poorest returns?

And if its ridiculous that corporations can be treated as an individual for funding purposes why aren't NZ unions equally lambasted for their massive monetary and in kind services to Labour and why has Labour lost many more elections than National despite this help?

A couple of other points.. if Trump is so bizarrely popular, why does he have the highest unfavourable counts of any presidential candidate in US polling history?.. maybe the writers should have explored this contradiction for the very important answer that has manifested itself in Canada, US and Britain in recent times.

It might also be instructive for the writers to look up the definition on fundamentalism to avoid looking like bigoted dickheads on the subject.


Jigsaw said...

I get very sick of [people who insist on judging American politics by some vaguely New Zealand types standards. Most don't seem even to understand how the federal system works or how there is always a tension between federal and states rights.
The other is the religious thing which works on both sides in the States. Last election Hillary had a 'prayer choir' in operation and again the religious thing is evident- that's just the way it is there. We don't have to like it or understand it.
At least their system gives vent to grassroots opinion and the party system has enough flexibility to deliver results -mostly. Also because of MSM most New Zealanders don't seem to realise just how unpopular Obama really is over there.

Anonymous said...

Also because of MSM most New Zealanders don't seem to realise just how unpopular Obama really is over there.

What is it: 30% overall and over 50% of white, non-college education males agree that Obama is ineligible to be President, let alone be popular!

Anonymous said...

As Malheur Patriots put it: "Why is Hiliary continuing to run for president?"