The difference between Democrats and Republicans

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Merlin1047, Oct 10, 2004.

  1. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    When it comes to highlighting the difference between the two presidential candidates and yes, even between the two major political parties today, Teddy Roosevelt said it best:

    "It is not the critic who counts, nor the man who points out where the strong man stumbled, or where a doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man in the arena whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs, and who comes up short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause. The man who at best knows the triumph of high achievement and who at worst, if he fails, fails while daring greatly, so that his place will never be with those cold timid souls who never knew victory or defeat."

    On the one hand, we have George W. Bush who had the backbone to do something. On the other hand, we have jacques francois kerrie who has the nerve to do nothing more than whine. Kerry, whose only position is that he would have done the same thing Pres. Bush has done, but he would have done it better. Kerry, who has no vision of his own, whose main, if not only, appeal to his supporters is that he is not George Bush. Kerry, who would seek the "cooperation" of the UN in defending this country and believes that Americans are too stupid to see that as a ploy and an excuse for doing nothing to defend this nation. Kerry, who claims that he has "never changed" his position on the war in Iraq and believes that Americans have insufficient recall to remember his dozens of "nuances".

    I can state from personal experience that for every person who dares to take action, there are at least a dozen whose only contribution to the effort will be to tell you why it can't be done. We are a country of doers and a country of nay-sayers. The doers move this nation. They may not always be right, but they are the ones who try and fail or try and succeed. The nay-sayers only have the occasional hollow victory of "I told you so" when a doer fails. The rest of the time they are the pathetic, bitter wretches who sit on the sidelines gathering dust.

    George Bush - perhaps imperfect, perhaps not well spoken, but a doer.

    Kerry - a glib, eloquent, slick, pretender with every hair in place. But behind the facade lurks - nothing. Kerry - a disgraceful nay-sayer being touted by a party of nay-sayers who tell us that doing nothing is dynamic and that taking action is an offense. They equate socialism with success and capitalism with evil. They equate the absence of war with peace. They equate cowardly hand-wringing with "diplomacy".

    One can only hope that the Democratic party will soon be consigned to the dustbin of history and a party with courage, vision and a fundamental faith in the individual will rise to take its place. The sooner, the better.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  2. phadras
    Offline

    phadras Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    270
    Thanks Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +17
    1980 I've felt for over 20 years that the Dems were near collapse... The only thing holding the party together are black Americans, that vote 'cuz they think Repub's are nothing but racists, what remains of union voting ( mostly now supported by the government employee unions), those that are socialists/communists, and finally the interest groups the Dems cut government checks for.. It's pathetic that really the only thing the Dems now stand for is huge government so they can buys votes...
    The End is near for the Dem party as it currently exists....
     
  3. 007
    Offline

    007 Charter Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    38,589
    Thanks Received:
    7,921
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +12,206
    That was an in depth description of what I call, a "stuffed shirt".

    But I think we'll always have a democratic party here in America. Just so long as there are still people looking to the government to get something for nothing. Basically, the uneducated, lazy, guttless, crowd.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    Unfortunately as the Democratic party drifts further left, it takes the Republicans along with it. Many Republican positions are an effort to minimize the advantage Democrats have among American socialists and those who have never met an entitlement program they didn't like. Socialized medicine, social security which continues to pay out far more than it should, prescription drug benefits are all leftist programs which the Republicans support in a vain effort to woo the "gimme more" element away from the Democrats. Worse, Republicans jepoardize our national security as well as our economy by refusing to secure the borders and control immigration. They do this in a futile attempt to pander to that element which supports the policy of uncontrolled immigration. One day Republicans may learn that there is no way conservatives can ever outdo liberals in the "gimme" arena. Republicans should simply abandon their efforts to cater to this element and instead concentrate on jobs, the economy, education and national security.

    The Republican party today is philosophically where the Democratic party was during the Kennedy administration.

    What we need is the ascendancy of a truly conservative party that places a higher priority on the welfare of the nation than on welfare programs and has leadership intelligent enough to know the difference.
     
  5. nosarcasm
    Offline

    nosarcasm Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    931
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Idaho
    Ratings:
    +68
    the influx of Latino voters through legal immigration will change the political
    game alot.

    Both parties are already trying to pander to their vote. Any politician that
    does ads in Spanish should not get your vote.

    The illegal immigration is tolerated by law enforcment and neither Bush
    or Kerry plan to crack down on that. It is apalling how the wishes of the
    majority is ignored by the corrupt elites.

    The US like France should make sure that only English is the official language.
    California already hires people with the demand for Spanish. I managed to learn English so can they.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  6. AequitasVeritas
    Offline

    AequitasVeritas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    83
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +7
    Merlin :clap: great post!
     
  7. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533


    That's the insidious evil of the Democrat Party. Given the power, they will increase programs which foster dependency on government, which steadily expands their constituency, and gives them a perpetual hold on power. They've got to be stopped.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    Exactly. There is a direct correlation between government welfare programs and social ills. When Lyndon Johnson hatched the "Great Society" the end result was MORE poverty, not less. Some low income wage earners saw government handouts preferable to working for their living. When the government came up with the "brilliant" AFDC program, the illegitimacy rate went up. When the government perpetrated the SSI program, some parents coached their children to act mentally handicapped in order to collect.

    Then we have the so-called "unemployment insurance" program. That started out as a good idea. But politicians buying votes can never leave well enough alone.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5000141972
    by Daniel P. McCmurrer , Amy B. Chasanov

    The Federal-State unemployment insurance (UI) system, created in 1935, was designed to provide temporary wage replacement for unemployed workers who have demonstrated a strong attachment to the labor force and to assist in stabilizing the national economy during cyclical economic downturns.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Over time, unemployment insurance benefits have been extended again and again until now they can be collected for 52 weeks.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Unemployment insurance: recent legislation.

    by Rita L. DiSimone

    New Federal legislation made all States eligible to provide temporary emergency unemployment compensation benefits, financed entirely by Federal funds, for 13 or 20 additional weeks to unemployed workers who had exhausted their benefits. The emergency benefits program is effective from November 17, 1991, to June 13, 1992. Liberalized provisions were also included for ex-servicemembers, nonprofessional school employees, and railroad workers. This legislation is Public Law 102-164, as amended, enacted on November 15 and December 4, 1991, respectively.

    On February 7, 1992, further legislation was enacted (Public Law 102-244) that extended the expiration date of emergency benefits from June 13 to July 4, 1992, and provided an additional 13 weeks of federally funded benefits to workers eligible under Public Law 102-164, as amended.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Democrats seek to expand these programs because they know that by creating ever more dependency, they broaden their voter base.
     
  9. YoungChristian
    Offline

    YoungChristian Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    64
    Thanks Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Conneaut Lake
    Ratings:
    +8
    This may be the wrong place to post this, but isn't Universal Health Care socialistic? How can we be a capitalistic society and have the government provide health care.

    Remember that the government that governs best, governs least.
     
  10. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533


    Excellent points, YC. Therein lies the fundamental difference between the two parties. Governments, being the creations of imperfect men, are bound to err. But, at least, the Republicans try (with varying degrees of success, I'll admit) to err on the side of the U.S. Constitution. They recognize that this document is unique in history - and is our only protection from the tyranny into which man-made governments must otherwise dissolve.

    The true power in the Democrat party lies in the grubby paws of unabashed America-haters like billionaire financier George Soros, and Ma and Pa Barker (aka Bill and Hillary). The Constitution is a major thorn in their sides, for, you see, they KNOW better than we what we need - them in power. What a ridiculous concept - everyday, UNENLIGHTENED people deciding what's best for themselves! Rest assured - the true, tyrannical nature of man is alive and well, and working overtime, trying to figure out a way around that pesky notion of "government of, by, and for the people".

    A belated welcome to the board!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page