Fundamental differences between Democrats and Republicans

[Ringel05]

Then why have you insulted the thread starter?

Try reading the preceding posts specifically post number 24, it's the one where you started your little game with me. Then go back and read all rdeans' previous posts over the whole time he's been here and hopefully you'll understand.

because your a partisan hack is the answer.

He made some very good points which you can not refute

Keep projecting, you are obviously in the same category rdean is and has been duly noted. When you decide to use what cognitive abilities you might have, you know open your mind to reality, not the hateful fantasy you imagine, then we can continue this discussion. Until then play the shill all you want, just don't try with me. I'll expose your juvenile game every time and you won't like it.
Oh yeah, not to mention you completely ignored my actual point - his stereotypical (hateful) generalizations.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Try reading the preceding posts specifically post number 24, it's the one where you started your little game with me. Then go back and read all rdeans' previous posts over the whole time he's been here and hopefully you'll understand.

because your a partisan hack is the answer.

He made some very good points which you can not refute

Keep projecting, you are obviously in the same category rdean is and has been duly noted. When you decide to use what cognitive abilities you might have, you know open your mind to reality, not the hateful fantasy you imagine, then we can continue this discussion. Until then play the shill all you want, just don't try with me. I'll expose your juvenile game every time and you won't like it.

Thats his only comeback to being on the losing side of an argument...i love you truthmatters...you are almost on Glenn Beck level for my personal entertainment.

 

[Charles Stucker]

What do you mean by "socialism"? Do you have any problem with all the money being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan?

I do have a problem with money spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our military should not be in those countries. It is, and I speak out against it, but neither party seems willing to change the situation.

Socialism is pretty well defined as follows "Spending public funds to help individuals address problems they have the ability to readily address on their own with hard work and frugality."
Can't afford a nice home? Work more or accept having a smaller house.
Want to retire in comfort? Keep tight control over your spending and work hard enough to save money for retirement.
Want health insurance? Get a bus pass rather than a Camero.

See how that works?
Socialism is not Roads, Armies, Police or Schools.
Perhaps if you are that ignorant you should try reading something more than a comic book.

 

[rdean]

rdean wrote it. Anyone who has been on this board for more than a week knows if you've read one of rdeans' posts you essentially read them all. His gig is the blame game, what's so hard to understand about that.

something Republicans never do.

Unfortunately, rdean, since you seem to be of the opinion that Republicans don't care about Americans dying, ain't very many people on this board gonna take anything else you say with any credence whatsoever.

Welcome to the 'serious idiot zone', you're in good company, Zona's there.

They care? I'm sorry, from their rhetoric, I never got that impression. I mean AFTER they are born. They seem much more taken with the unborn than those that are actually waiting at emergency rooms for health care or serving in Afghanistan waiting for funding.

 

[obama2ndterm]

By Jon Perr Wednesday Apr 15, 2009 6:15pm
Lie #2: The estate tax devastates small businesses and family farms.

This Republican scam over the so-called "death tax" is as bogus now as it was when President Bush first perpetrated it eight years ago. The House GOP budget, fittingly unveiled by Rep. Paul Ryan on April Fool's Day, would eliminate the estate tax altogether. While Nevada Senator John Ensign recently griped, "It destroys a lot of small businesses and a lot of family farms and ranches in America," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) groused:

"People who aren't wealthy, who may have built up value in land over generations and many family farms find themselves in situations where they've got to sell the farm in order the pay the taxes."

But as the Washington Post explained, under President Obama budget, 99.76% of estates would pay no taxes whatsoever:

The estate tax is scheduled to disappear in 2010, only to be resurrected the following year at its 2001 level, when it applied only to estates worth over $2 million per couple at a rate of 55 percent. In fact, no one expects it to return to that level -- although letting it do so would be a far more rational response to the current crisis than the Lincoln-Kyl approach. Rather, President Obama has proposed holding the tax at this year's level: an exemption of $7 million per couple, with a 45 percent rate for amounts beyond that; this would cost $484 billion over 10 years. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) has endorsed this solution, with indexing for inflation. This would hardly be punitive. At that level, 99.76 percent of estates would incur no tax whatsoever. Those who owe would pay, on average, $2.25 million less than they would have paid at the 2001 exemption level. Why in the world should these folks get more of a tax cut?

Why? Because even in a time of national economic calamity, the Republican Party remains committed to dramatically shifting the tax burden away from the wealthiest Americans. (And unfortunately, Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and nine other Democrats are aiding and abetting that transfer by supporting a lower tax rate of 35% for estates starting at $10 million per couple. The price tag? $250 billion.)

Last week, the Tax Policy Center quantified just how few family farms or small businesses are actually impacted by the estate tax proposals under consideration:

We estimate that under the Obama proposal, 100 family farms and businesses would owe tax. (We define such estates as those where farm or business assets are valued at under $5 million and comprise the majority of estate assets.) The Lincoln-Kyl proposal would cut the number to 40. Even under current law, fewer than 2,700 family farms and businesses would owe

 

[obama2ndterm]

10 Republican Lies for Tax Day
By Jon Perr Wednesday Apr 15, 2009 6:15pm
Here, then, are 10 Republican Tax Day lies:

1. President Obama will raise taxes on small businesses.
2. The estate tax devastates small businesses and family farms.
3. 40% of Americans pay no taxes.
4. Tax cuts always increase revenue.
5. The GOP is the party of fiscal discipline.
6. Ronald Reagan was the greatest tax cutter of all time.
7. FDR caused the Great Depression, or at least made it worse.
8. Obama's cap-and-trade plan will cost each American family $3,100 a year.
9. Obama's tax proposals will undermine charitable giving.
10. The rich pay too much in taxes already.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, Charles Stucker, that is not a definition of socialism that is accepted by the vast majority of knowledgable people. Try again.

 

[Charles Stucker]

No, Charles Stucker, that is not a definition of socialism that is accepted by the vast majority of knowledgable people. Try again.

You don't qualify as a knowledgeable person so your opinion has no merit.
The definition I gave of socialism is quite workable and avoids the idiocy of calling everything the government spends money on as socialist - which I have heard people claim.

 

[oreo]

Fundamental differences between Democrats and Republicans

I see the references about events and am amazed at how Democrats and Republicans see the same thing in such remarkably different ways. Two subjects especially even though there are so many.

Ones I could talk about but won’t. Gay rights. Republican politicians will send money back to the conservative gay group “the Log Cabin” who sent them money. Even though the gay population is probably between 3 and 5% of the entire population, Republicans see them having equal rights as a much larger threat than the 50% divorce rate among heterosexuals, and the “swingers clubs in every state and the “swingers” conventions.

I also won’t talk about the Republican suspicion of scientists motives or that the majority of Republicans believe that a man could build a boat out of wood, pitch and nails and fill that boat with “million of pairs” of animals and ride out a “world wide” flood while taking care of these millions of animals.

Instead, let’s talk about Freddie/Fannie and the housing crisis. The way I understand what happened that brought about the collapse of the housing industry was that Freddie/Fannie used to provide mortgages. But, to procure one of these mortgages, you had to have a job and prove you could pay back the loan. During that time, Freddie/Fannie provided more than 70% of all mortgage loans in the US. After the deregulation of Wall Street, the mortgage business was moved to Wall Street so now they provided more than 70% of all mortgages. Wall Street passed out those mortgages with virtually no restrictions. The then took those loans, bundled them together and sold them overseas as “securities”. When those with the mortgages defaulted, that left foreign investors holding the bag.

Now, I have heard that it was Barney Frank behind the entire collapse, but I have never heard it explained how that could be. A gay Jew had that much power, even when the Republicans held both houses, the presidency and even had a majority in the Supreme Court? Republicans return money from gays, yet it was all Barney Frank?

Second:

I’ve heard how it’s so much better now in Iraq. They even show us the “purple finger” to prove it.

Everything I’ve heard is much different. When I point out that the new Iraqi constitution makes “Islam” the “national religion” and says “all legislation is based on Islam” (Article 2), Republicans shrug. They say, “Well, Islam is their religion, so what?”, besides, it’s none of our business. Worse, I’ve heard Republicans say Islam is dangerous and violent.

So thousands of our youngsters died in Iraq, plus, we killed tens of thousands of their people, and we are financing their rebuilding, but we don’t get a say in their new constitution? I don’t understand why not? Even worse, the Christian population was estimated to be almost 1 and a half million. Christians in Iraq have been chased out of the country; women raped or forced to convert to Islam. The population is now estimated to be between 3 to 4 hundred thousand. This has been reported in every major newspaper and news service in the world. Yet, American Republicans don’t seem to care.

And even worse, women now have to live under Islamic law. Walk around outside covered. They can’t leave home without a male escort. That means no jobs and no healthcare. Even though the US insisted that one third of cabinet posts go to women, which only stand if there are candidates available. Well, if they can’t go outside, can’t be uncovered, how can they run for office? Obviously, they can’t. Remember, they are now under Islamic law. The US insisted this be in their constitution. So the US could have had a greater impact, but didn’t.

Both women’s groups and Christians say things were better under Saddam. American Republicans say they are wrong. So who is right? American Republicans or those that live over there?

I would be interested in some Republicans writing down on what it is that Democrats have wrong about these issues.

What I expect is, “You stupid f*cktard, you don’t know what you are talking about”. It seems that name calling has become the “response”. No one ever “explains” their position. I still don't know why Republicans feel a hardcore Islamic government is ok in Iraq or why the housing collapse is because of Barney Frank.

--There is not a 1/16" inch difference between a republican or democrat. After all, we're all Americans.

Where you will find your difference is between "Conservative & Liberal"--regardless of which party you claim to be from. Believe it or not, there are conservative democrats & there are liberal republicans.

And if you, as you stated that women were better off under Sadam Husien--then you have a mental issue that neither republican nor any democrat woman could possibly understand.

Welcome to America!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Charles, you may call a rose a planet all you want, but still . . . your definition of socialism is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of Americans. You know that. Thus you know your definition is nonsense. Whether you accept it is immaterial to the fact that it is nonsense.

 

[California Girl]

Charles, you may call a rose a planet all you want, but still . . . your definition of socialism is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of Americans. You know that. Thus you know your definition is nonsense. Whether you accept it is immaterial to the fact that it is nonsense.

Joke, you have this habit of speaking on behalf of the American people. FYI, you don't. Just sayin'. You speak as an individual, your opinion is an opinion, not a fact.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The Real Differences Between Republicans and Democrats

... and there really aren't as many as some of the hyperpartisans would have you believe. But don't trust one of the hyperpartisans to tell you what the differences that really do exist are. They will just try to paint their side in the most flattering terms and the others in the most negative. I do have many dogs in many fights but I am an independent who has voted for both Democrats, Republicans , Indpendents, and a smattering of "third party" types.

So let me take a stab at it.

The Democratic Party Contains
Minorities and their supporters who were drawn by the Democrats' support of civil rights and school desegregation.
Women and their supporters who were drawn by the party's support for equal rights for women.
Environmentalists
Folks who feel it is the legitimate role of government to offer a helping hand to those whose circumstances have taken a turn for the worse and need temporary assistance.
Folks who feel perpetuating an aristocrasy is contrary to the American principal of "all men are created equal."
Folks who feel those who are reaping the greatest rewards from our society have the greatest obligation to fund it.
Folks who believe that 190 years of systemic inequities are not erased overnight.

The Democratic Party ALSO Contains
Folks who are more interested in saving an endangered species than they are in saving a person's livlihood that he/she supports his/her family with.
Folks who are satisfied with the lifestyle afforded by public assistance and the charity of others.
Folks who chaffed under inequities in our system and who want the opportunity to turn the tables on those who they believe oppressed them.
Folks who believe it is a legitimate function of government to shield them from the consequences of their actions.

The Republican Party Contains
Folks who have made the effort to support themselves and their families and believe all others should be expected to do the same.
Folks who believe they can protect their rights and their interests with little or no government assistance and others can do it too if they choose.
Folks who believe that giving advantages to employers creates advantages for all.
Folks who believe that compassion is not legislated.

The Republican Party ALSO Contains
Racists who were drawn the party's opposition to civil rights and school desegregation.
Folks who have inherited or "good ol' boy networked" their way into benefits and advantages and who want to protect that aristocrasy for themselves and their children.
Evangelicals who want the rules of Christainity to be written into U.S. law.
Folks who profit from our bounty of natural resources and who want to protect their gravy train whether it is ecologically wise or not.

And BOTH Parties Contain
A whole lot of honest, hard-working, intelligent, compassionate people who share the common goals of creating a more just and more prosperious society but who simply disagree on the means and methods to reach those goals.

 

[rightwinger]

And BOTH Parties Contain
A whole lot of honest, hard-working, intelligent, compassionate people who share the common goals of creating a more just and more properious society but who simply disagree on the means and methods to reach those goals.

Well said. Now, can't we all just get along?

 

[nodoginnafight]

And BOTH Parties Contain
A whole lot of honest, hard-working, intelligent, compassionate people who share the common goals of creating a more just and more prosperious society but who simply disagree on the means and methods to reach those goals.

Well said. Now, can't we all just get along?

LOL - probably not.
But hey, worth a shot.

 

[California Girl]

something Republicans never do.

Unfortunately, rdean, since you seem to be of the opinion that Republicans don't care about Americans dying, ain't very many people on this board gonna take anything else you say with any credence whatsoever.

Welcome to the 'serious idiot zone', you're in good company, Zona's there.

They care? I'm sorry, from their rhetoric, I never got that impression. I mean AFTER they are born. They seem much more taken with the unborn than those that are actually waiting at emergency rooms for health care or serving in Afghanistan waiting for funding.

The only reason for your pathetic 'Republicans don't care about Americans dying' shit is purely for partisan point scoring. I don't mind partisan point scoring - everyone does it - but, personally, I find anyone who claims that one party or the other does not care about 'Americans dying' is partisan beyond any honesty. While I rarely agree with you, I have - until now - respected you to some small degree. Now, no. Your comment was beyond political point scoring - it was worthy only of the pondscum that inhabit both parties - those who are so fucking blind to anything other than party loyalty, that any comment - no matter how ridiculous or low - is fine. It isn't. It is not acceptable to blanket accuse all members of any political party of not caring about the suffering of others.

The difference, between someone like you and someone like me is that I acknowledge that parties are made up of individuals.... Individuals who do not all fall into lockstep with one another. You are just a deluded little freak who thinks all democrats are saints and all republicans are sinners. You are an idiot.

 

[saveliberty]

Always, never, all and none are the precursors to a false statement. Which sort of makes this post suspect huh?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Charles, you may call a rose a planet all you want, but still . . . your definition of socialism is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of Americans. You know that. Thus you know your definition is nonsense. Whether you accept it is immaterial to the fact that it is nonsense.

Joke, you have this habit of speaking on behalf of the American people. FYI, you don't. Just sayin'. You speak as an individual, your opinion is an opinion, not a fact.

It is a fact that Stucker's definition of socialism is nonsense.

And it is a very good informed opinion that most Americans would consider Stucker's definition of socialism to be nonsense.

Don't like it: who cares?

 

[chanel]

Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives

If a Conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one. If a Liberal doesn't like guns, they believe no one should have one.

If a Conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat. If a Liberal is, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.

If a Conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. A Liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a Conservative is homosexual, he quietly enjoys life. If a Liberal is homosexual, they loudly demand legislated respect.

If a Conservative is a minority , he sees himself as independently successful. Their Liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a Conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A Liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a Conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a Conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church. A Liberal wants all churches to be silenced.

If a Conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A Liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.

If a Conservative disagrees with a Liberal president, he is called a racist. When a Liberal disagrees with a Conservative president, it's patriotic dissent.

If a Conservative expresses his political view, he is called an idiot. A Liberal expressing his political views is expressing his right to Freedom of Speech.

“I never use the words Democrats and Republicans. It’s Liberals and Americans.
- James Watt, Ronald Reagan’s Interior Secretary

Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives

I am chanel and I approve this message.

 

[kyzr]

My simplified definitions are:
Republicans believe in the rights of individuals as equals.
Democrats believe that some people are always more equal than others.

 

[rdean]

Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives

If a Conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one. If a Liberal doesn't like guns, they believe no one should have one.

If a Conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat. If a Liberal is, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.

If a Conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. A Liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a Conservative is homosexual, he quietly enjoys life. If a Liberal is homosexual, they loudly demand legislated respect.

If a Conservative is a minority , he sees himself as independently successful. Their Liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a Conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A Liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a Conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a Conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church. A Liberal wants all churches to be silenced.

If a Conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A Liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.

If a Conservative disagrees with a Liberal president, he is called a racist. When a Liberal disagrees with a Conservative president, it's patriotic dissent.

If a Conservative expresses his political view, he is called an idiot. A Liberal expressing his political views is expressing his right to Freedom of Speech.

“I never use the words Democrats and Republicans. It’s Liberals and Americans.
- James Watt, Ronald Reagan’s Interior Secretary

Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives

I am chanel and I approve this message.

“I never use the words Democrats and Republicans. It’s Liberals and Americans."

And that is what the Republicans have been so good at. Making Democrats/Liberals unAmerican. Saying the President consorts with terrorists and all kinds of terrible and odious charges we have heard mentioned too many times.

and yet,

It's the Republicans who many say they want to secede from the Union.

It's the Republicans who want to stand in the way of civil rights.

It's the Republicans who block the funding of soldiers overseas and use them for political reasons.

Republicans want to end social security and have no plan to take care of the elderly. What is that telling us what we should do with the elderly?

It's the Republicans who don't want to spend money on America's infrastructure even though 70,000 bridges have been named "unsafe".

It's the Republicans who want to bring religion into government (perhaps similar to the Iranian style of government?.

And yet, somehow, the Republicans have convinced the majority of Americans, that they are somehow "patriotic". Odd, truly odd.