If Jefferson founded the Republican Party what place do Democrats have in America?

Those really interested in this subject might want to check out Wiseacre's U.S. Presidential Elections thread on this forum. He's written most of the posts there but I've also contributed substantially.

The Democratic-Republican Party, unlike the Federalists, the Whigs, and various minor parties, did not dissolve, ever, not once. In the time of Andrew Jackson, the party was renamed the Democratic Party, which name it still bears. (So of course the OP could not be more wrong; it's the Democrats, not the Republicans, that trace back to the D-Rs.) You could sort of call it a liberal party back then, but from Jackson down to Lincoln it would be more accurate to call it an "agrarian" party -- for preserving the agrarian nature of the U.S. economy and pursuing Thomas Jefferson's vision, against industrialization and all of the government activities that went along with that.

The Federalists, Whigs, and Republicans (by which I mean the one that bears that name today -- founded in the 1850s, first president was Abraham Lincoln, etc.) were all industrial parties, advocating strong central government for the purpose of encouraging the development of industry. Beginning in the 1840s-1850s, the issue of slavery also arose and anti-slavery parties (minor ones like the Free Soil Party) to advocate abolition. The Republicans were the first to combine industrialism with abolitionism.

The Civil War resolved the agrarian-industrial issue. The Democrats thereafter were confined to a challenger role for the most part until under Woodrow Wilson they adopted the reformer, progressive, or industrial-liberal role that was first championed by Republican Theodore Roosevelt. Under Franklin Roosevelt the Democrats made a huge comeback and were never again as weak as between the Civil War and the Great Depression.

As for big versus small government, both parties are big government now, the only difference lies in what exactly they want the government to do.


I agree with everything in Dragon's post, except at the end whe he says both parties are for big gov't. The GOP definitely wants smaller gov't, less gov't spending, and less gov't intervention than the Dems do. Bush43 not withstanding, that was then and this is now.

Since Nixon, Republicans have campaigned on smaller government and never delivered

We should trust them now?
 
Frankly, I don't trust any of 'em. If I thought Obama did a good job this past 3 years, I'd vote for him, but in my view he did not. It's time to give the GOP another shot, I think the Tea Party influence will force them into a smaller gov't and less spending than we'd get from Obama.
 
Jayzus!

First, let's get our history straight. The Republican Party (the GOP) was founded in the 1850s. The first national candidate was John C. Fremont of the new state of California, founded only five years before. Not Thomas Jefferson. The first candidate elected as a Republican was Abraham Lincoln (who fought a war to unite and strengthen a NATIONAL government over Conservatives who were fighting for state's rights).

As a result of the Civil War, all southern states (the former Confederacy) merged politically into what became known as the "Solid South". A region where a Republican could win only if the Democrat candidate was dead. And sometimes not even then.

Conservatives believe in state's rights in all things other than national defense. It stands to reason, and it was expressed as so, that "state's rights" was the defense of segregation and the oppressive "Jim Crow" laws. Remember, Conservatives.

Don't swap political party for political ideology just to right a wrong committed in history.



Can you say "Dixiecrat"? Learn to read or something.
 
Those really interested in this subject might want to check out Wiseacre's U.S. Presidential Elections thread on this forum. He's written most of the posts there but I've also contributed substantially.

The Democratic-Republican Party, unlike the Federalists, the Whigs, and various minor parties, did not dissolve, ever, not once. In the time of Andrew Jackson, the party was renamed the Democratic Party, which name it still bears. (So of course the OP could not be more wrong; it's the Democrats, not the Republicans, that trace back to the D-Rs.) You could sort of call it a liberal party back then, but from Jackson down to Lincoln it would be more accurate to call it an "agrarian" party -- for preserving the agrarian nature of the U.S. economy and pursuing Thomas Jefferson's vision, against industrialization and all of the government activities that went along with that.

The Federalists, Whigs, and Republicans (by which I mean the one that bears that name today -- founded in the 1850s, first president was Abraham Lincoln, etc.) were all industrial parties, advocating strong central government for the purpose of encouraging the development of industry. Beginning in the 1840s-1850s, the issue of slavery also arose and anti-slavery parties (minor ones like the Free Soil Party) to advocate abolition. The Republicans were the first to combine industrialism with abolitionism.

The Civil War resolved the agrarian-industrial issue. The Democrats thereafter were confined to a challenger role for the most part until under Woodrow Wilson they adopted the reformer, progressive, or industrial-liberal role that was first championed by Republican Theodore Roosevelt. Under Franklin Roosevelt the Democrats made a huge comeback and were never again as weak as between the Civil War and the Great Depression.

As for big versus small government, both parties are big government now, the only difference lies in what exactly they want the government to do.


I agree with everything in Dragon's post, except at the end whe he says both parties are for big gov't. The GOP definitely wants smaller gov't, less gov't spending, and less gov't intervention than the Dems do. Bush43 not withstanding, that was then and this is now.

Since Nixon, Republicans have campaigned on smaller government and never delivered

We should trust them now?

Of course they cant deliver because of independents and Democrats.
Newt's BBA(Balanced Budget Amendment) passed the House and fell one vote short in the Senate. Today our debt would be $0, not $16 trillion. 100% of the impetus for small government is Republican and had been since Jefferson founded the Party. Such an obvious point should never escape you again.
 
What place to dems have in America?

good lard. You sir are little more than a would be tyrant.

and

Is this merely left wing ranting or can you support what you say? How can Republicans be tyrants when they are for limited government?

The republican party is for limited government? Is that why they vote to use that government's authority to prevent gays from getting married? Limited government, but one that enforces morality when it suits them? Is that why we have a patriot act? Because Republicans are all about limited government?

Not saying all republicans agree with these things, but making the blanket statement that Republicans are for limited government is silly.



Are the Republicans against a federal law allowing gays to marry?

Why on Earth should there be Federal law for that? This is definitely a states' rights issue.

The reason it's legal to get married as a same sex couple in some states and not in others is because it is a states rights issue.

What's you thinking on a national driver's license? How about paying all taxes directly to the Feds and dissolving states' governments altogether?

If there are no states rights, there is no need for states. If there are no property rights, there is no need for private property. Should all of it belong to the Feds all the time the for all time?

If that's your stand, then welcome to the Democrat Party.
 
Last edited:
of course that is 100% absurd, Jefferson looked at all of history and gave us freedom from all central governments regardless of period




here are 50 Jefferson quote to prove you are 100% wrong:

"That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."

"The path we have to pursue[when Jefferson was President ] is so quiet that we have nothing scarcely to propose to our Legislature."

-The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

-The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

" the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to grain ground; that the greater the government the stronger the exploiter and the weaker the producer; that , therefore, the hope of liberty depends upon local self-governance and the vigilance of the producer class."


-A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor (read-taxes) and bread it has earned -- this is the sum of good government.

-Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

-History, in general, only informs us of what bad government is.

-I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

-I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

-My reading of history convinces me that bad government results from too much government.

-Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence.

-Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.

-The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.

-Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

-Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.

-Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

-I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious
"Agriculture, manufactures, commerce and navigation, the four
pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most
free to individual enterprise. Protection from casual
embarrassments, however, may sometimes be seasonably interposed."
--Thomas Jefferson: 1st Annual Message, 1801.

"The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens
free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits."
--Thomas Jefferson to M. L'Hommande, 1787.

"[Ours is a] policy of not embarking the public in enterprises
better managed by individuals, and which might occupy as much
of our time as those political duties for which the public functionaries are particularly instituted. Some money could be
lent them [the New Orleans Canal Co.], but only on an assurance that it would be employed so as to secure the public objects."
--Thomas Jefferson to W. C. C. Claiborne, 1808.

"The rights of the people to the exercise and fruits of their own industry can never be protected against the selfishness of rulers
not subject to their control at short periods." --Thomas Jefferson
to Isaac H. Tiffany, 1816.

"Our wish is that...[there be] maintained that state of property,
equal or unequal, which results to every man from his own industry
or that of his fathers." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural
Address, 1805.

"To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to
others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of
association--the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." --Thomas Jefferson: Note
in Tracy's "Political Economy," 1816.

"Private enterprise manages so much better all the concerns to which it is equal." --Thomas Jefferson: 6th Annual Message, 1806.

"The merchants will manage [commerce] the better, the more they are left free to manage for themselves." --Thomas Jefferson to Gideon Granger, 1800.


"If ever this vast country is brought under a single government, it will be one of the most extensive corruption, indifferent and incapable of a wholesome care over so wide a spread of surface." --Thomas Jefferson to William T. Barry, 1822. ME 15:389


Some] seem to think that [civilization's] advance has brought on too complicated a state of society, and that we should gain in happiness by treading back our steps a little way. I think, myself, that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. I believe it might be much simplified to the relief of those who maintain it." --Thomas Jefferson to William Ludlow, 1824. ME 16:75

The parties of Whig and Tory are those of nature. They exist in all countries, whether called by these names or by those of Aristocrats and Democrats, Cote Droite and Cote Gauche, Ultras and Radicals, Serviles and Liberals. The sickly, weakly, timid man fears the people, and is a Tory by nature. The healthy, strong and bold cherishes them, and is formed a Whig by nature." --Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:492

"Agriculture, manufactures, commerce and navigation, the four pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most free to individual enterprise. Protection from casual embarrassments, however, may sometimes be seasonably interposed." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Annual Message, 1801. ME 3:337

"The power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State (that is to say, of the commerce between citizen and citizen) which remain exclusively with its own legislature, but to its external commerce only; that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes." --Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on Bank, 1791. ME 3:147

"Our tenet ever was that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated, and that, as it was never meant that they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action; consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money. ." - Thomas Jefferson


"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretenses for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."

-- Thomas Paine


When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretenses for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."
-Thomas paine

"If the government robs Peter to pay Paul, it can always count on the support of Paul." [in America to bottom 45% pay no Federal taxes]
-Winston Churchhill

"The government of the United States [federal government] is a definite government confined to specified objects [powers]. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. CHARITY IS NO PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT."
-James madison
Jefferson: "Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."


Patrick Henry
Tell me when did liberty ever exist when the sword and the purse were given up?

Thomas Jefferson
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."



I see,... and with the deepest affliction, the rapid strides with which the federal branch of our government is advancing towards the usurpation of all the rights reserved to the States, and the consolidation in itself of all powers, foreign and domestic; and that, too, by constructions which, if legitimate, leave no limits to their power... It is but too evident that the three ruling branches of [the Federal government] are in combination to strip their colleagues, the State authorities, of the powers reserved by them, and to exercise themselves all functions foreign and domestic."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1825. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson


James Madison: "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions."

James Madison: "The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specific objectives. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."

James Madison in Federalist paper NO. 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce."




I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." - Benjamin Franklin

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-Benjamin Franklin

"The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself." - Benjamin Franklin

One single object... [will merit] the endless gratitude of the society: that of restraining the judges from usurping legislation.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Edward Livingston, March 25, 1825
Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Wilson Nicholas, September 7, 1803


That these are our grievances which we have thus laid before his majesty, with that freedom of language and sentiment which becomes a free people claiming their rights as derived from the laws of nature, andnot as the gift of their chief magistrate.

Thomas Jefferson, Rights of British America,
1774

The Constitution... is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Judge Spencer Roane, September 6, 1819


The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Taylor, May 28, 1816

They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please...Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given them. It was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.

Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on National Bank, 1791



Okay libs. Cite the Jefferson quotes that illustrate the Communist stance taken by the Democrat Party of today.
<<<<<
Quoting Jefferson proves nothing regarding the core values of liberalism. Jefferson was a liberal and during his time, governments were entititys that took away one of those core values, freedom. If you read the Declaration of Independence you will see Jefferson express some of those core values of liberalism and his concept of government. At least reading the Declaration is a start. Incidently Jefferson never wrote letters to the editor regarding the new Constitution, he was in France.



You have access to the Declaration on the web.

Please, cut and paste those portions of the Declaration that are demonstrative of Liberal thinking as it exists in today's American Liberalism.

Please hurry. I'm not a young man.
 
Agreed, except that it wasn't just during Jefferson's time that governments took away freedom. The entire concept of government is the restriction of individual freedom.




To the contrary, without a government, the rule of law is absent and the law of the jungle reigns supreme.

If you live in fear of your life, you have no freedom. Societal agreement on a particular set of rules to regulate the activities of all is the only method found to be successful in granting greater freedom to people.
 
The republican party is for limited government? Is that why they vote to use that government's authority to prevent gays from getting married? Limited government, but one that enforces morality when it suits them? Is that why we have a patriot act? Because Republicans are all about limited government?

Not saying all republicans agree with these things, but making the blanket statement that Republicans are for limited government is silly.

as a liberal you miss the point. Yes, Republicans since Jefferson have been for limited government or freedom from big liberal government, but this is different from being anarchists. Jefferson was not for gay marriage
 
It depends on which Republican party you're talking about. The current GOP doesn't trace it's lineage back to the Democratic-Republican party

of course thats absurd since they have the same name and philosophy. In fact, Greely named lincoln's Party Republican because of name and philosophy. What more do you want?



and you can probably find that if you read further down that Wiki article. The current Republican party was formed in the 1860's.

yes to revive the name and philosophy of Jefferson's Party. Is it making sense now?

By lineage I mean actual lineage. I share most of Jefferson's ideals, but I can't rightly say that he was my ancestor when my mom's Hawaiian Chinese and my dad's Scotch Irish. Even if they had named me Thomas with J as my middle initial, the guy wouldn't suddenly cameo on my family tree.

The GOP isn't the same party as the Democratic-Republicans because they're not the same party as the Democratic-Republicans. Jefferson's Republicans fractured somewhere in the early 1800's, and one of the fragments actually evolved into what is today called the Democratic party, which is why that party -can- claim -actual- lineage back to Jefferson's Republicans. My grandfather, on my mother's side, was a wife beater, an abusive father, a thug involved in organized crime. . . many things to which I am diametrically opposed. These differences in philosophy don't remove him from my family tree. My mother still sprung forth from his loin, and thus I am still a product thereof. The current Democrats might disagree in rhetoric and legislation with Jefferson's core principles, but their party still sprung forth from the loin of his, so to speak.



Are bowels a part of the loins?
 
Restriction of individual freedom may or may not be the role of government, depends on the government. America has lost a lot of individual freedom since 1789 but when you consider the US has gone from a population of five million or so to three hundred million and we have changed from an agriculture nation to a manufacturing nation with the cities and jobs and so on....

There's no may or may not about it. The basic scope of any government is the enforcement of societies laws. Laws, by nature, are limits to what you're allowed to do, i.e. limits to individual freedom. Therefore the basic scope of any government is the enforcement of limits to individual freedom.

These limits may seem basic. Don't kill each other, for instance. They're still limits.




That is true on a theoretical basis, but in actuality, there is a minority of mean sons o bitches that will do whatever they can to subjugate those around them. By limiting the "freedom of the bullies to subjugate others, the vast majority is afforded greater freedom.
 
Quoting Jefferson proves nothing regarding the core values of liberalism.

why would it given that Jefferson was ultra conservative and as such wanted a very very limited government. To demonstrate this he started the Republican Party which today claims Grover Norquist, Ron Paul, and the Tea Party as members


Jefferson was a liberal and during his time,

if so then a liberal is for very very limited government


At least reading the Declaration is a start. .

its a start at best. He formed the Republican to make final what his concept of America had been all along, namely, the home of freedom from big liberal government.
 
*FINDING. FDR kept this country together when Communism and Fascism were genuine threats.


kept it together by prolonging the Depression for 10 years that caused WW 2? If BO prolongs this recession for 10 years will he be your hero too?

The Depression didn't cause WWII. And it wasn't "prolonged" by FDR's policies. You may want to study history a bit. The disparity in wealth was leading to a rise in populist movements in this country..like Communists and Fascists. This place was ripe for a revolution. FDR tamped down those angry voices by implementing social programs in a package called "The New Deal". The economic calamity faced in this country was caused by Laissez-faire capitalism..and it was a tough slog getting out of it.



The question is simply whether or not the the policies of FDR hurried us out of the Depression or not.

His policies did not get us out of the Depression so getting us out of the Depression is not a debatable point. It's a little like the Obama "recovery".

If Obama's recovery was like the Bush economy that he derided, he'd probably be elected king.

It's not. the Big 0 is failing. FDR did fail. We can argue whether or not his policies were right for the time or not, but it cannot be argued that his policies corrected the problem. We know that the policies used by FDR failed and we know the there same updated policies used by the Big 0 are failing.
 
The Depression didn't cause WWII.

Hitler never would have come to power in a million years without the Depression to make the world desperate


And it wasn't "prolonged" by FDR's policies.

****Here's what Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Secretary of the Treasury (the man who desperately needed the New Deal to succeed as much as Roosevelt) said about the New Deal stimulus: "We have tried spending money.We are spending more than we ever have spent before and it does not work... We have never made good on our promises...I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!"

"The New Republic"( at the time a FDR greatest supporter") noted. In June 1939, the federal public works programs still supported almost 19 million people, nearly 15% of the population" [page 313]

In fact in 1939, unemployment was at 17%, and there were 11 million additional in stimulus make work welfare jobs. Today when the population is 2.5 times greater we have only 8 million unemployed. Conclusion: legislation to make Democrats illegal
is urgently needed


"The New Deal". The economic calamity faced in this country was caused by Laissez-faire capitalism..and it was a tough slog getting out of it.

I know its way way over your head but Friedman and Bernanke say it
was caused by Federal Reserve Policy. You'd need Econ 101 before you're allowed to talk on the subject.
 
Really, it would seem they have little place in America given that their ideas about big government are the opposite of the basic Constitutional idea of limited central government formalized by our founders.

FDR was really the first liberal Democrat and his New Deal was mostly leftist inspired, not America inspired, as his choice of Henry Wallace, Alger Hiss and the others would indicate. Now they have Obama who had two communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders. How can we conclude that Democrats are anything but a genuine Trojan Horse on American soil? I have yet to hear an answer to this.

In the Republican vision of America, Democrats have no place. Neither do blacks or gays or most women or Muslims or scientists or college professors or teachers or....Well, except for ignorant white southern so called Christians, no one really. But they do have room for trailers. Lots and lots of trailers. Oh, and beer and guns.
 
The question is simply whether or not the the policies of FDR hurried us out of the Depression or not.

No, that's an absurd oversimplification of the issues of the era in a blatant attempt to make Roosevelt's legacy look bad.

In addition to that question, which isn't really a question and that's why you cherry-picked it, there are at least the following:

1) Whether his policies reduced the suffering of the Depression and helped make things better than they would have been otherwise.

2) Whether, absent those reforms, things would have gotten so bad that a real risk of an overthrow of the government and imposition of either a fascist or a Marxist despotism would have existed.

3) Whether the long-term changes in economic policy introduced by Roosevelt contributed to the amazing prosperity of the nation after World War II.

None of these questions is subsumed in the one you asked.
 
1) Whether his (FDR's)policies reduced the suffering of the Depression and helped make things better than they would have been otherwise.

how can prolonging the Depression for 10 years, by interfering with the free market, and causing WW 2 reduce suffering???

****Here's what Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Secretary of the Treasury (the man who desperately needed the New Deal to succeed as much as Roosevelt) said about the New Deal stimulus: "We have tried spending money.We are spending more than we ever have spent before and it does not work... We have never made good on our promises...I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!"

"The New Republic"( at the time a FDR greatest supporter") noted. In June 1939, the federal public works programs still supported almost 19 million people, nearly 15% of the population" [page 313]

In fact in 1939, unemployment was at 17%, and there were 11 million additional in stimulus make work welfare jobs. Today when the population is 2.5 times greater we have only 8 million unemployed. Conclusion: legislation to make Democrats illegal
is urgently needed
 
2) Whether, absent those [FRD's]reforms,

a 10 year depression and World War is a liberal's idea of reform?? You are perfectly brainwashed. You have no idea whatsoever. Now we can see why so many millions followed Hitler Stalin Mao. For humans thinking is often not necessary at all; our liberals are perfect proof of it. Is it a surprise our liberals spied for Stalin? Is it a surprise FDR loved Henry Wallace and Alger Hiss?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top