Look around this nation. What IS going on. Why is everyone seemingly filled with anger, even rage right now? What gives.

There's not one answer for this. Your anger is driven by so many different things.

If you're a conservative, you're angry because you see the world changing too fast for your tastes: a black man as POTUS; LGBTQ's being allowed to marry; women allowed in combat roles in the military; a foreign policy that isn't aggressive enough for you, among other things.

If you're liberal, you're angry because you see conservatives blocking progress, as you view it, at every turn; continuing to allow the wealthy and corporations to, as you see it, keep their boots on the neck of the poor and middle class and to give them all the tax incentives, among other things.

If you're are white, many of you don't like the fast-changing demographics of the nation, where whites aren't as powerful as they once were, and you have concerns about minorities wielding more power, among other things.

If you're Hispanic or Latino, you're angry because you're been portrayed as a bunch of crooks and lowlifes by far too many in this nation, and, in your view, you're being used as a scapegoat by others for their own shortcomings.

As an African-American, you're angry because you continue to see your sons, and sometimes daughters, being killed by law enforcement in what you see as some dubious circumstances, and you are angry at the backlash from some white because they resent an African-American being president.

If you're LGBTQ, you're angry because a large segment of society, as you see it, is still trying to keep you as second-class citizens, as certain groups, whether out of fear of what they don't know, or on some religious grounds, feels it's proper to discriminate against you, among other things.

If you're a Muslim in America, like the other minorities, you feel you're being targeted unfairly because of the actions of Muslims mostly in other nations, and in how many in this nation are openly threatening you, among other things.

If you're a Born-Again Christian, you are angry because, as you see it, the nation has gotten away from you perceive as God's Word, and that you honestly believe your religious leaning is good enough to make laws from and to enact discrimination against those you feel are sinners, among other things.

So, where is all this leading to? Could it lead to the rise of Fascism in this nation, as it did in Germany in the 1920's? Will progressivism triumph as the demographics continue to change toward a more diverse makeup of the nation? Will some of these factions lash out violently against others? Or will we actually be able to sit down and discuss and try to solve what divides us?

The floor is open for debate.

I'm pretty happy.

Everyone is told the other side is nothing but idiots and is told the other side's opinions are invalid because they are idiots.

vikkyvik wrote:

I'm pretty happy.

Well, that really pisses me off.

My family is pretty happy - but they mostly live in NorCal and LA and have good jobs.

I have been overseas for 10 years, so I'm plenty happy. Home looks more and more like a loony bin from the outside

You should have said "why does everyone ON TV, RADIO, and other MEDIA seem so angry."

I've honestly not seen one angry person in public about any of the things you mentioned- only on TV and other media type shows.

The Nation has largely been functioning and people have been behaving exactly the same as they have for the last 200 years. Don't buy into the madness.

LenPepperbottom wrote:

You should have said "why does everyone ON TV, RADIO, and other MEDIA seem so angry."

I've honestly not seen one angry person in public about any of the things you mentioned- only on TV and other media type shows.

The Nation has largely been functioning and people have been behaving exactly the same as they have for the last 200 years. Don't buy into the madness.

You are obviously new to the internet. Welcome.

Hillis wrote:

If you're a conservative, you're angry because you see the world changing too fast for your tastes: a black man as POTUS; .

The floor is open for debate.

I am guessing more conservatives are angry at Obama's liberal policies than the fact that he is biracial. After all Colin Powell who is also biracial was a favorite among conservatives and Ben Carson who is both black and conservative was second only behind Trump in many of the early primaries. Herman Cain who is also black and a supporter of the Tea Party movement was a front-runner early on in the Republican primaries for the 2012 election.

I'm perfectly happy. Those who seem unhappy or angry tend to be the talking heads and their minions and the problem is, they're angry at the wrong people.

seb146 wrote:

You are obviously new to the internet. Welcome.

LOL!

It's hard to say whether this anger is genuine, justified, or simply fostered by the relentless hammering of the media which thrives on bad news and sensationalism.

I believe most of the angry people are angry at things that do not directly affect them. Middle and low class white folks in the midwest, for instance, are apparently all angry at immigration and foreigners 'invading' their country when I'll bet you that they barely even see a non-white person all year. New Yorkers and most people living in large cosmopolitan cities, where most immigrants settle, tend to be a lot more accepting and liberal on the matter.

That said, the US government is fairly dysfunctional. There are too many interest groups, buoyed by tons of corporate money, that have too much leverage on it. The Government is meant to help all citizens, not to offer tailored laws to those who pay them the most. This has largely led to a increasingly fast gap between the rich and poor. Trickle down economics do not work, nor does socialism. There is a just middle somewhere.

In any case, the danger is that anger leads to people being more inclined to vote for populists who know how to take advantage of the situation for their own profit while generally end up doing more damage than anything else when in power. It seems we have a hard time learning from the past...

A country gets the government it deserves. That's the beauty and danger of democracy. Look what happened to Venezuela. It essentially destroyed itself through populism.
Democracy is a fragile equilibrium, and, I'll say it again, I believe we have collectively forgotten how much our forefathers gave for it.
It is not only our duty to vote, but also our duty to make an educated and rational vote based on facts and issues rather than feelings and emotions.
Let's hope for the best in November, and then hope that Europe will survive its own populism threat in the near future.

Hillis wrote:

So, where is all this leading to? Could it lead to the rise of Fascism in this nation, as it did in Germany in the 1920's?

There is a decidedly non-zero chance that Donald Trump could be elected president. So...yes.

It's an interesting question. There have been studies on happiness. Turns out, the US is among the nations with the lowest happiness. Why? Theories suggest it has to do with our loss of community (be it clubs, religious affiliation, moving away from family, hobbies). We have replaced it with more reclusive activities (like being on a.net 24/7).

Conversely, Israel rates very high on the happiness factor. Even with all the violence, and even with the huge disagreements with regard to the government, there is a sense of community that creates positive feelings. (Mind you - this is among the population of citizens, not taking into account the Palestiian situation).

Why SHOULDN'T black or Latino Americans be angry? That should be the question. Black people in America are treated worse than dogs and monkeys in American zoos.

And then you have the "blue lives" people who claim the American police can do no wrong. Well, in my world, it's wrong to kill any human extra-judicially under the shadow and lie of "I felt threatened". I'm sometimes in high pressure situations where I can feel "threatened"; I can't take a gun out and shoot the person.

Another question that should be asked is: "Why is America still like the "wild west"?"

Gun slinging cops and criminals. The difference is: police should be held to a higher standard than criminals.

Yet another question that should be asked: "Why do American police almost always shoot to kill?"

Why don't they ever try to shoot to injure. I'm sure some 2nd amendment, gun slinging, police-apologist will say something silly in response like: the torso is a larger target. Police are trained to shoot. A beat cop using a handgun at close range, given proper training, can easily choose to shoot someone in the legs...which are a pretty large target themselves.

I'll probably get ripped a new one for daring to suggest this but it seems a lot of issues like this began to explode when the Reagan administration and Congress repealed the Fairness Doctrine in broadcasting. All of a sudden the media started telling people that this or that was wrong or an outrage without needing to put the other side of the argument. People watched and listened and were left angry without being told the whole story.

It led to the rise of Rush Limbaugh, Fox Noise and MSNBC among others.

"everyone" is so vague. I don't particularly notice anyone angry in the US.
Maybe you are one of those people who just sees things from an angry point of view. People can and do.
Try to relax and stop and smell the roses (as they say).

Aeri28 wrote:

"everyone" is so vague. I don't particularly notice anyone angry in the US.
Maybe you are one of those people who just sees things from an angry point of view. People can and do.
Try to relax and stop and smell the roses (as they say).

I agree! I am happy and everyone around me seems for the most part happy. Sure, there is a lot to be unhappy about, like our two hopeless presidential candidates, but there is so much more to be happy about. No matter who wins the election, America will get through the next 4 years and still be the best country to live in. You might say I am too optimistic, but it is a lot better than being depressed about everything. My country does have a lot of problem, previously mentioned by other posters, but we have gotten through worse problems in the past and have only come out stronger.

Blue Skies,
Eagle15

A major area of unhappiness is the economy for many. That includes a number of related issues. A lack of good paying jobs, especially for those of limited education but even college educated persons. CEO's getting millions and huge payouts while most see flat or declining incomes. Debts, especially student loans for some, no honest person can hope to pay off. Excessively high costs for housing and healthcare. Tax rates that keep going up. Shifting of many down from the 'middle class' to 'working class' and poverty. Getting almost negative interest rates on their savings while credit cards have usurious rates.That our politicians have done little to really help the majority of citizens and instead pander to their rich and corporate contributors making things worse. For some, being Black, Hispanic/Latino, Muslim, facing economic discrimination
Economic change and decline in many American's views has driven many to support 'angry' commentators, persons like Donald Trump, exploiting that anger for personal gain and attention.

In the US politicians, activists for different groups and their supporters in the 'news media' have done a great job of building a climate of fear.

Finding solutions for the problems the US, or any nation, faces is hard difficult work.

Politicians and 'community activists' don't want to do hard work. They don't want to be responsible when their ideas don't work.

So it is easier to blame problems on someone else rather than work on really making a difference and making people's lives better.

Mir wrote:

Hillis wrote:

So, where is all this leading to? Could it lead to the rise of Fascism in this nation, as it did in Germany in the 1920's?

There is a decidedly non-zero chance that Donald Trump could be elected president. So...yes.

I admire your optimism, unfortunately however in the real world he stands a good chance, appealing as he does to a substantial part of the population that is angry and feels that they have been let down.

In regard to the original question, as an occasional visitor to the US whose wife has most of her close relatives living there, the anger is only too apparent, examples below:

To the wife's aunt everyone to whom you do not agree is a "jerk"
When it comes to medical matters, the painful truth is firstly rarely given as a diagnosis, and if it is, its immediately discounted as the doctor is obviously a "jerk"
When we last visited she went into panic mode because a person walked by who she didn't know.
Airport staff bark orders, yet more anger.
I could go on and on.




The recent incident where the police responded to a report of a broken down car in the middle of the road is a prime example, here in the UK if you called the Police and reported it the likely response would be "what do you expect us to do about it, we're busy" Eventually when time permitted a car with a single officer would call by. he would park the car, wander over to it, likely scratching his gonads on the way, have a quick look and tell the driver to call a tow truck. Meanwhile in the US its responded to by at least four officers and a helicopter, on arrival the officers draw weapons, assume a combat crouch and start shouting orders, the situation rapidly develops the driver is then both tasered and fatally shot. Having seen the video footage it is obvious, the drivers behaviour is not rational in the face of four armed officers in a country with a near on shoot to kill policy, but nor is that of the police, how can you escalate a simple report of a broken down vehicle to a fatal shooting so quickly ? the answer is as the thread started "everyone's angry"

I wonder if it is connected to the change in the state of World affairs, go back to 1945 and the USA's supremacy in the World was unquestioned, meanwhile here in the UK, we were worn out by the struggle of two World wars on our doorstep which had taken us from World supremacy to near bankruptcy. It took us a long time to get over it, the anger was highly apparent particularly as I grew up in the 1970's with mass strikes and picketing, plus casual hooliganism often loosely connected to football. Fortunately with an unarmed population and police force, the injuries weren't fatal. The US is now seeing the rise of the commercial might of the far East, and Islamic terrorism in the middle East, neither of which can be readily controlled, the result being a dent in National pride. is this a major contribution to the anger ? . If so it could go on for a long time, as I said earlier it took the UK decades to stop being really angry.

24 hour news cycle, everything is always in your face. In old news days, paper or world news in the evening carried events of the last 24 hours without the drama of the talking heads

dmg626 wrote:

24 hour news cycle, everything is always in your face. In old news days, paper or world news in the evening carried events of the last 24 hours without the drama of the talking heads

Being told "this is why you should be angry" does contribute to everyone sounding angry all the time.

I remember, when I was young, people would write well thought out and coherent letters to the editor of local newspapers or well thought out and coherent letters to their members of Congress. Now, it is just people shouting about how they are not being heard so everyone else's opinions are invalid when they fell they are being ignored. No one is entitled to feel victimized when someone disagrees with their opinion.

My personal theory is that all these angry people simply aren't getting laid.

I'm a white, male, middle class, college kid. I don't qualify for a work-study job because I don't qualify for financial aid because my parents make almost $100,000 per year, combined. College kids are held to ridiculously high standards when it comes to getting jobs, I was looking at a job that had "entry level" in the title, and they wanted 3-5 years experience, same with some internships I looked at! Combine that with campus carry being aloud in Texas and tensions are high because liberal/conservative extremism is a real thing on, especially on college campuses, I'm scared because I shouldn't have to be in fear if my life when my ultimate goal is to just live within my means and not worry about any thing.

Also as a white male, I'm virtually not allowed to show a different point of view without being labeled as a Nazi, or sexist, or racist, or anything of that nature.

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm a white, male, middle class, college kid. I don't qualify for a work-study job because I don't qualify for financial aid because my parents make almost $100,000 per year, combined. College kids are held to ridiculously high standards when it comes to getting jobs, I was looking at a job that had "entry level" in the title, and they wanted 3-5 years experience, same with some internships I looked at! Combine that with campus carry being aloud in Texas and tensions are high because liberal/conservative extremism is a real thing on, especially on college campuses, I'm scared because I shouldn't have to be in fear if my life when my ultimate goal is to just live within my means and not worry about any thing.

Also as a white male, I'm virtually not allowed to show a different point of view without being labeled as a Nazi, or sexist, or racist, or anything of that nature.

Funny. As a white, middle class (I'll add in for you here, straight) male, nobody has an issue with what I say if I use these funny things like nuance, understanding, respect, acceptance of other views. Except other white, middle class males.

Kinda odd eh?

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm a white, male, middle class, college kid. I don't qualify for a work-study job because I don't qualify for financial aid because my parents make almost $100,000 per year, combined. College kids are held to ridiculously high standards when it comes to getting jobs,

Welcome to the real world buttercup! Everyone wants experienced people at entry level wages. What the heck do you think America has been fighting for the past 30 years??? This isn't new to your generation. I had to move across the country 3 times to take jobs that paid less than they should, for far more work than I should have. This is exactly what many people are complaining about. I'm now in my early 40's and I'm already seeing signs of age discrimination. They want someone with 20+ years of experience to work for less than what I was making in 1999! Why do you think people are complaining the economy isn't working for the bottom 95% of workers???

coolian2 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm a white, male, middle class, college kid. I don't qualify for a work-study job because I don't qualify for financial aid because my parents make almost $100,000 per year, combined. College kids are held to ridiculously high standards when it comes to getting jobs, I was looking at a job that had "entry level" in the title, and they wanted 3-5 years experience, same with some internships I looked at! Combine that with campus carry being aloud in Texas and tensions are high because liberal/conservative extremism is a real thing on, especially on college campuses, I'm scared because I shouldn't have to be in fear if my life when my ultimate goal is to just live within my means and not worry about any thing.

Also as a white male, I'm virtually not allowed to show a different point of view without being labeled as a Nazi, or sexist, or racist, or anything of that nature.

Funny. As a white, middle class (I'll add in for you here, straight) male, nobody has an issue with what I say if I use these funny things like nuance, understanding, respect, acceptance of other views. Except other white, middle class males.

Kinda odd eh?

Believe me, I am very open minded, and I get along with almost everyone I meet. I just don't believe in damn in someone whose opinion even slightly deviates from your own. It's just that there are no more people in this country that are open to a constructive and educated argument. It's like walking on eggshells.

I appreciate your point in don't damn anyone who disagrees with you. That would mean nobody would have a husband or a wife, you probably might not even have friends.

It's just amazing US faith, race, religious and politics doesn't have this filter.

TWA772LR wrote:

Believe me, I am very open minded, and I get along with almost everyone I meet. I just don't believe in damn in someone whose opinion even slightly deviates from your own. It's just that there are no more people in this country that are open to a constructive and educated argument. It's like walking on eggshells.

That must be sooooooo awful for you. Not being able to express your opinion on minority issues and rights. That's sad you feel so vercletmpt about openly expressing how you as a white, straight, male, millennial, feels to all of your coworkers who aren't. How do you cope???

PacificBeach88 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Believe me, I am very open minded, and I get along with almost everyone I meet. I just don't believe in damn in someone whose opinion even slightly deviates from your own. It's just that there are no more people in this country that are open to a constructive and educated argument. It's like walking on eggshells.

That must be sooooooo awful for you. Not being able to express your opinion on minority issues and rights. That's sad you feel so vercletmpt about openly expressing how you as a white, straight, male, millennial, feels to all of your coworkers who aren't. How do you cope???

You're adding to the truth behind this meme, PacificBeach88.

coolian2 wrote:

I appreciate your point in don't damn anyone who disagrees with you. That would mean nobody would have a husband or a wife, you probably might not even have friends.

It's just amazing US faith, race, religious and politics doesn't have this filter.

Thank you for acknowledging my point.

TWA772LR wrote:

You're adding to the truth behind this meme, PacificBeach88.

Good! Maybe that will help you to not mansplain things to your female coworkers too.

PacificBeach88 wrote:

That must be sooooooo awful for you. Not being able to express your opinion on minority issues and rights. That's sad you feel so vercletmpt about openly expressing how you as a white, straight, male, millennial, feels to all of your coworkers who aren't. How do you cope???

Are you saying white, straight, male, millennial people aren't allowed to express their opinions?

If not, what's your point, besides being an ass?

TWA772LR wrote:

I'm a white, male, middle class, college kid. I don't qualify for a work-study job because I don't qualify for financial aid because my parents make almost $100,000 per year, combined. College kids are held to ridiculously high standards when it comes to getting jobs, I was looking at a job that had "entry level" in the title, and they wanted 3-5 years experience, same with some internships I looked at! Combine that with campus carry being aloud in Texas and tensions are high because liberal/conservative extremism is a real thing on, especially on college campuses, I'm scared because I shouldn't have to be in fear if my life when my ultimate goal is to just live within my means and not worry about any thing.

Also as a white male, I'm virtually not allowed to show a different point of view without being labeled as a Nazi, or sexist, or racist, or anything of that nature.

I hope you use better grammar and punctuation when you are applying for jobs.

Angry people ought to move to Denmark, we are the happiest nation on Earth!

Come join us in our happy fantasy land*








*your experience may differ, happiness not guaranteed by the state, also, 50% income tax

The current state of political discourse began with the rise of the Clintons. They were incredibly foul and still are. Perhaps it will end soon.

Honestly, I think most people are doing ok and are relatively happy. Granted, everyone has stuff to complain about (especially if the conversation turns to politics), but I think most decent, intelligent people aren't walking around in a constant rage.

But, I think PacificBeach88's posts in this thread are a good example of why many people are annoyed with political discourse in this country. Someone makes an honest attempt at stating their opinion, and someone else is quick to jump in with a sarcastic, smarmy response that tries to invalidate or disparage another person's thoughts or opinions. You want to talk about anger and hatred, that dude is a pretty good example of it on this forum.

Boeing717200 wrote:

The current state of political discourse began with the rise of the Clintons. They were incredibly foul and still are. Perhaps it will end soon.

LMAO! As if. Bill Clinton was breathlessly pumped by the media as a "fresh air" to the partisan hell that was before him (and continued and worsened under him). And do you think Reagan's lie he told about "Cadillac driving welfare queens" helped race relations much? Come on! LOL!

WASHINGTON -- President-elect Bill Clinton's assurances that he doesn't "want a continuation of the Cold War between the Congress and the White House" and that "Pennsylvania Avenue will run both ways again" are about what you would have expected him to say after his first post-election meeting with the Democratic congressional leadership.

All his campaign criticism of a Congress that had lost public confidence with its pay raises and internal banking troubles was put behind him now that he didn't have to worry that too close a kinship with the Democratic leaders might hinder his election chances.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1992-1 ... ry-leaders

PacificBeach88 wrote:

Boeing717200 wrote:

The current state of political discourse began with the rise of the Clintons. They were incredibly foul and still are. Perhaps it will end soon.

LMAO! As if. Bill Clinton was breathlessly pumped by the media as a "fresh air" to the partisan hell that was before him (and continued and worsened under him). And do you think Reagan's lie he told about "Cadillac driving welfare queens" helped race relations much? Come on! LOL!

WASHINGTON -- President-elect Bill Clinton's assurances that he doesn't "want a continuation of the Cold War between the Congress and the White House" and that "Pennsylvania Avenue will run both ways again" are about what you would have expected him to say after his first post-election meeting with the Democratic congressional leadership.

All his campaign criticism of a Congress that had lost public confidence with its pay raises and internal banking troubles was put behind him now that he didn't have to worry that too close a kinship with the Democratic leaders might hinder his election chances.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1992-1 ... ry-leaders

It's clear your aren't old enough to remember the early 90's. It appears you weren't even around for Reagan or the Cold War either.

Why Does Everyone In The U.S. Seem To Be Angry?

I give Rupert Murdoch and his Fox news a lot of the credit for that.
He set the tone for the common person's understanding of world and national events.

He also was a strong force in the selling of the Iraq war which cost the US trillions of dollars (so far) which has helped to muck up the economy.

Boeing717200 wrote:

It's clear your aren't old enough to remember the early 90's. It appears you weren't even around for Reagan or the Cold War either.

Your response is an ad hominem attack? That's all you've got? You think someone has to be your exact age to know what is going on? No older (or they're living in the past) and no younger (or they can't remember all of what you do). There is no logic behind your thinking from what I can see.

I think you're a perfect example of someone who has watched too much Fox news. Clinton left the budget balanced, the national debt at its lowest point in real terms for the last 100 years, the country at peace (and Sandy Berger had put the focus on OBL by the fall of 2000.) The military at peak readiness when his term was up, partly because Clinton had resisted pressure from the right to invade Iraq.

Also, the national debt might have been even more paid off if it were not for all the meaningless, unwarranted investigations of the sitting president and the destructive attempt at impeachment that Fox news and neocons such as yourself insisted on having.

Boeing717200 wrote:

It's clear your aren't old enough to remember the early 90's. It appears you weren't even around for Reagan or the Cold War either.

I gave you a newspaper article from 1992. Why didn't you bother to refute that? What did you learn from the cold-war / "Cold War" that applies to today? Also, why do you think your first hand knowledge of Reagan is beneficial to you not answering my question/s?

And just because Asians don't age like white people, doesn't mean I wasn't around for Bill Clinton, I was.

PacificBeach88 wrote:

Boeing717200 wrote:

It's clear your aren't old enough to remember the early 90's. It appears you weren't even around for Reagan or the Cold War either.

I gave you a newspaper article from 1992. Why didn't you bother to refute that? What did you learn from the cold-war / "Cold War" that applies to today? Also, why do you think your first hand knowledge of Reagan is beneficial to you not answering my question/s?

And just because Asians don't age like white people, doesn't mean I wasn't around for Bill Clinton, I was.

What does the way you age physically have anything to do with this? Nobody knows what you look like. He was talking about your tone, which is obvious.

Boeing717200 wrote:

The current state of political discourse began with the rise of the Clintons. They were incredibly foul and still are. Perhaps it will end soon.

All of the hatred toward the Clintons was sour grapes over Clinton winning against GHWB. There had been twelve years of Republicans in the White House and a lot of saber rattling by right wing pundits claiming that socialism and communism and marxism will take over if Clintons are allowed to lead. That everything would go to hell in a handbasket if Clintons are not stopped. Stopped from what, they never said. The right wing pundits just kept emphasizing that the Clintons are bad people and need to be stopped. Every investigation of them and the only thing they found it is what they already knew: Bill likes women.

Get over it.

LenPepperbottom wrote:

What does the way you age physically have anything to do with this? Nobody knows what you look like. He was talking about your tone, which is obvious.

No it isn't! I have no idea how much time he's been poking around my profile, FB page, or other Google searchable ID I've posted about. There's no way my "age" is "obvious" from the way I speak about the Reagan years or Clinton years. As I've said, I was there, which means you're just as dead wrong as he is, which given your OBVIOUS previous postings is no surprise either.

I do know that Clint Eastwood is looking for students at his Empty Chair University.

salttee wrote:

Why Does Everyone In The U.S. Seem To Be Angry?

I give Rupert Murdoch and his Fox news a lot of the credit for that.
He set the tone for the common person's understanding of world and national events.

He also was a strong force in the selling of the Iraq war which cost the US trillions of dollars (so far) which has helped to muck up the economy.

I don't think you can totally blame Fox News or News Corp.

I think some of the angry people in the USA living in a fairly nice home and driving a reasonably decent car would do well to live in the shoes of those far less fortunate for a bit of a reality check.

People in the USA by and large have been pretty fortunate to live in a very stable country.

salttee wrote:

Boeing717200 wrote:

It's clear your aren't old enough to remember the early 90's. It appears you weren't even around for Reagan or the Cold War either.

Your response is an ad hominem attack? That's all you've got? You think someone has to be your exact age to know what is going on? No older (or they're living in the past) and no younger (or they can't remember all of what you do). There is no logic behind your thinking from what I can see.

I think you're a perfect example of someone who has watched too much Fox news. Clinton left the budget balanced, the national debt at its lowest point in real terms for the last 100 years, the country at peace (and Sandy Berger had put the focus on OBL by the fall of 2000.) The military at peak readiness when his term was up, partly because Clinton had resisted pressure from the right to invade Iraq.

Also, the national debt might have been even more paid off if it were not for all the meaningless, unwarranted investigations of the sitting president and the destructive attempt at impeachment that Fox news and neocons such as yourself insisted on having.

No one knew what Fox News was in 1998. They didn't gain any real notoriety until the 2000 election cycle because they weren't widely available. Everyone was watching CNN or MSNBC before then. Thanks for the failed attempt at revisionist history though. That was an epic fail.

LenPepperbottom wrote:

PacificBeach88 wrote:

Boeing717200 wrote:

It's clear your aren't old enough to remember the early 90's. It appears you weren't even around for Reagan or the Cold War either.

I gave you a newspaper article from 1992. Why didn't you bother to refute that? What did you learn from the cold-war / "Cold War" that applies to today? Also, why do you think your first hand knowledge of Reagan is beneficial to you not answering my question/s?

And just because Asians don't age like white people, doesn't mean I wasn't around for Bill Clinton, I was.

What does the way you age physically have anything to do with this? Nobody knows what you look like. He was talking about your tone, which is obvious.

Indeed. He might be more effective if he didn't come off like an 16 year old troll.

I am happy with my life and career and opportunity over the last many years. Am I satisfied, hell no. We have watched the political system completely corrupted, the economy raped by the wealthy corporations, the economic and tax system rigged for the wealthy and our most dangerous enemy, China enriched by that very same rigged economy. We have impoverished our own people by the millions to enrich the wealthy while sending our wealth elsewhere which is now coming back to bite us in the ass. I have mine because of the time slot I was born into. The land of opportunity then. Certainly not so much now.

I am hardly "angry"; disappointed with how toxic the nature of discourse has become, infused with the notion that opposing viewpoints are personal attacks and not just... opposing viewpoints.

Perhaps the worst result of all of this is the increased belief that government can fix all this... and it cannot... and the effort to have government "fix" social ills virtually always (1) fails to fix, and (2) reduces liberty - for everyone.

Ask yourselves: Who benefits from this?