This claims Democrats & Republicans ARE different.

[muh_roads]

I'm not usually the first to give credit to liberals for anything but I found this to be an interesting read.

This report claims that the democrat congress has been filibustered by the republican minority every step of the way to look as if they are a "do-nothing congress".
http://assets.ourfuture.org/documents/con_20080730_obstruction_real_story_110.pdf

Some of those things I am still glad did not pass. I don't like subsidies for anything personally. What are your thoughts?

[lynnf]

I'm not usually the first to give credit to liberals for anything but I found this to be an interesting read.

This report claims that the democrat congress has been filibustered by the republican minority every step of the way to look as if they are a "do-nothing congress".
http://assets.ourfuture.org/documents/con_20080730_obstruction_real_story_110.pdf

Some of those things I am still glad did not pass. I don't like subsidies for anything personally. What are your thoughts?

Democrats do the same thing when they are in minority... SOP. Still no practical difference between the two parties.

lynn

[expatriot]

Rather like using marbles in a coin-tossing event - confusing if nothing else
and none are ever satisfied with the outcome. :rolleyes:

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Not to mention the filibusters are purely procedural tactics employed by both parties. It says nothing about ideology.

[acptulsa]

Even the most homogeneous pack of wolves will growl and snap over a prize piece of pork.

NPR was trying to sell the idea that there's still a difference this morning. They said Dubya's call for more regulation in the financial sector represented a "shift". I asked them how the administration that created DHS--the biggest boondoggle and threat to state sovereignty since Reagan's ED--was shifting gears now. Seems like a shift from overdrive to fourth to me.

[Truth Warrior]

The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/

An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>

[acptulsa]

An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>

I love it. Think I'll buy one to use as a journal. But if you post that link for the thousandth time, I'll still accuse you of spamming. I hope you understand.

[Truth Warrior]

I love it. Think I'll buy one to use as a journal. But if you post that link for the thousandth time, I'll still accuse you of spamming. I hope you understand.

"Deja vu, all over again." -- Yogi Berra :)

At least, my post is "ON TOPIC", unlike your's. :rolleyes:

Oh no, not the dreaded spamming accusation. :p

DUH! :D

[Kade]

The country has shifted to more progressive ideology...

We don't know this because we are ruled by corporations, and a media that tells us "A report suggests" or "Some say"

Instead of a simple... "The evidence is..."

The GOP has blocked everything it could... they still control this country, and they have appointed judges who are willing to strip you of your rights while you guys continue to whine about economic regulations.

[TastyWheat]

After reading some history it's clear Republicans are the liberals of yesteryear and Democrats are neo-socialists. They are different, but neither one is what this country needs.

[Danke]

The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/

An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>

I hate large books, so here are the cliff notes.


http://www.betterstainedglass.com/Newsletter/Archives/2005Sept-howtohandle/paper1.jpg

[Truth Warrior]

I hate large books, so here are the cliff notes.


http://www.betterstainedglass.com/Newsletter/Archives/2005Sept-howtohandle/paper1.jpg

That summarizes the vast differences between them very well TOO.<IMHO> ;)

[Kade]

After reading some history it's clear Republicans are the liberals of yesteryear and Democrats are neo-socialists. They are different, but neither one is what this country needs.

Nothing about the destruction of privacy, justice, due process, and free thought and expression from Republicans is liberal, nothing.

[acptulsa]

Nothing about the destruction of privacy, justice, due process, and free thought and expression from Republicans is liberal, nothing.

True. Yet, number one, many have called themselves liberal but not lived up to it through history, and number two, the drive "toward the moderate center" is just a coverup for the fact that TPTB is shoving the "moderate center" to the left.

[Truth Warrior]

True. Yet, number one, many have called themselves liberal but not lived up to it through history, and number two, the drive "toward the moderate center" is just a coverup for the fact that TPTB is shoving the "moderate center" to the left. BINGO! Have a cookie. :D

[Kade]

True. Yet, number one, many have called themselves liberal but not lived up to it through history, and number two, the drive "toward the moderate center" is just a coverup for the fact that TPTB is shoving the "moderate center" to the left.

Everything I see is a movement towards the right.... I don't see any liberals in congress or the senate.. with the possible exception of Barney Frank.

[Truth Warrior]

Everything I see is a movement towards the right.... I don't see any liberals in congress or the senate.. with the possible exception of Barney Frank.
http://www.lawrence.edu/sorg/objectivism/socfasc.html :rolleyes:

[Andrew-Austin]

Everything I see is a movement towards the right.... I don't see any liberals in congress or the senate.. with the possible exception of Barney Frank.

Are the democrats conservative?

[Kade]

Are the democrats conservative?

The Democrats are socialist idiots.

[Kade]

This isn't rocket science guys...

The quickest way to identify a liberal is by the content of what he is talking about...

If he is railing against police states, authority, restrictions of freedoms, etc... you are dealing with a liberal. It's about priorities.


Example:

"The vast amount of human activity ought to be none of the government's business," (Rep. Barney) Frank said during a Capitol Hill news conference.

[acptulsa]

Everything I see is a movement towards the right.... I don't see any liberals in congress or the senate.. with the possible exception of Barney Frank.

The move toward socialization has always been called a move to the left. The move toward a police state has often been called a move to the right. Look on the two-axis chart we like and it all becomes a plunge into the communistic abyss.

[Kade]

The move toward socialization has always been called a move to the left. The move toward a police state has often been called a move to the right. Look on the two-axis chart we like and it all becomes a plunge into the communistic abyss.

Agreed. Aren't we heading towards a socialized police state? :cool:

[CUnknown]

Everything I see is a movement towards the right.... I don't see any liberals in congress or the senate.. with the possible exception of Barney Frank.

Exactly. There are two camps of Republicans in DC -- the neo-cons (e.g. Bush II) and the realists (e.g. Bush I). In this power struggle, the realists have basically lost out, and the Republican party has moved rightward towards what is essentially a soft fascism. This left the door open for the Democrats to also move right. They are currently occupying the political space of the 'realist' Republicans.

Even Obama is basically running as a Republican, a realist Republican. On his trip to the mideast, he took with him Chuck Hagel (a realist Republican). Bill Clinton was definitely a Republican during his time in office -- for example, he balanced the budget and undermined welfare. Not your father's Democrat.

But, at the same time, both Dems and Reps are more 'progressive' than 'conservative.' They are just right-wing progressives.

The Dems still try to talk like liberals, especially during primary season, but it hasn't effected their policy for quite some time. Once in power, Obama will govern like a realist Republican. Even the health care reform issue wouldn't happen unless it had large scale support from business leaders.

Edit: This idea that the country is moving towards socialism is completely untrue ... unless I don't understand what the prevailing concept of socialism is on this board. We are certainly not moving towards what I understand to be socialism, anyway.

[Truth Warrior]

Exactly. There are two camps of Republicans in DC -- the neo-cons (e.g. Bush II) and the realists (e.g. Bush I). In this power struggle, the realists have basically lost out, and the Republican party has moved rightward towards what is essentially a soft fascism. This left the door open for the Democrats to also move right. They are currently occupying the political space of the 'realist' Republicans.

Even Obama is basically running as a Republican, a realist Republican. On his trip to the mideast, he took with him Chuck Hagel (a realist Republican). Bill Clinton was definitely a Republican during his time in office -- for example, he balanced the budget and undermined welfare. Not your father's Democrat.

But, at the same time, both Dems and Reps are more 'progressive' than 'conservative.' They are just right-wing progressives.

The Dems still try to talk like liberals, especially during primary season, but it hasn't effected their policy for quite some time. Once in power, Obama will govern like a realist Republican. Even the health care reform issue wouldn't happen unless it had large scale support from business leaders.
http://www.lawrence.edu/sorg/objectivism/socfasc.html

[Kade]

Exactly. There are two camps of Republicans in DC -- the neo-cons (e.g. Bush II) and the realists (e.g. Bush I). In this power struggle, the realists have basically lost out, and the Republican party has moved rightward towards what is essentially a soft fascism. This left the door open for the Democrats to also move right. They are currently occupying the political space of the 'realist' Republicans.

Even Obama is basically running as a Republican, a realist Republican. On his trip to the mideast, he took with him Chuck Hagel (a realist Republican). Bill Clinton was definitely a Republican during his time in office -- for example, he balanced the budget and undermined welfare. Not your father's Democrat.

But, at the same time, both Dems and Reps are more 'progressive' than 'conservative.' They are just right-wing progressives.

The Dems still try to talk like liberals, especially during primary season, but it hasn't effected their policy for quite some time. Once in power, Obama will govern like a realist Republican. Even the health care reform issue wouldn't happen unless it had large scale support from business leaders.

Edit: This idea that the country is moving towards socialism is completely untrue ... unless I don't understand what the prevailing concept of socialism is on this board. We are certainly not moving towards what I understand to be socialism, anyway.

I agree with you 100%.

I don't bring up socialism much here... if only to placate some of the uninformed.

The prevailing idea of what constitutes socialism on these forums is education, health care, insurance...etc.

And if you are liberal, you are apparently a socialist... and if truth warrior finds the thread, he throws out the same link, over and over... wouldn't be surprised if he already did in this thread.

So then liberalism, the strong and passionate belief in personal liberty is suddenly fascism, the essence of negation of freedom.

It's bullshit.

[Andrew-Austin]

If he is railing against police states, authority, restrictions of freedoms, etc... you are dealing with a liberal. It's about priorities.



Priorities?

Well if economic freedoms and non-intervention in the economy allow for me and everyone I care for, to provide themselves with essentials such as food and shelter, why exactly should I consider economic freedom less important than things like warrantless wiretapping?

With a severe depression looming over us, you might be feeling comfortable financially, but some of us still rightly view economic matters to be just as important as civil liberties.

[Kade]

Priorities?

Well if economic freedoms and non-intervention in the economy allow for me and everyone I care for, to provide themselves with essentials such as food and shelter, why exactly should I consider economic freedom less important than things like warrantless wiretapping?

With a severe depression looming over us, you might be feeling comfortable financially, but some of us still rightly view economic matters to be just as important as civil liberties.

Economic freedom in the way most of you believe in it, might actually be the cause of our loss of our ability to feed and shelter ourselves... frankly.

I strongly believe the "economic freedom" of creditors to invest poorly, is going to cripple this country, in a way we have not seen before.

[CUnknown]

[...]And if you are liberal, you are apparently a socialist... and if truth warrior finds the thread, he throws out the same link, over and over... wouldn't be surprised if he already did in this thread.

So then liberalism, the strong and passionate belief in personal liberty is suddenly fascism, the essence of negation of freedom.

It's bullshit.

If the neo-cons are right-wing progressives, me and you must be left-wing conservatives. :D

It's very silly to call all liberals socialists ... and also silly to call socialists fascists. But, calling liberals fascists... heh, you've pretty much done a rhetorical 180 there.

Truthwarrior - that link you gave does have some good points. Fascism and socalism do have some similarities. They also have a lot of differences. Certainly, Sweden today is far different than Nazi Germany, lol. Although there are some similarities, you are correct. More differences than similarities, though.

[CUnknown]

Economic freedom in the way most of you believe in it, might actually be the cause of our loss of our ability to feed and shelter ourselves... frankly.

I strongly believe the "economic freedom" of creditors to invest poorly, is going to cripple this country, in a way we have not seen before.

I believe in the right of creditors to hand out sub-prime loans (if we think that charging interest should be allowed at all, anyway). I think that people should be allowed to accept them. That's free exchange. However, there does need to be some oversight to make sure people aren't being lied to.

Essential to a free exchange of anything is honesty. As long as everything is above board, and both parties know exactly what they're getting into, I think that basically anything should be allowed. But, this is rarely the case -- all these subprime loans that you (rightly) say are ruining the economy of this country -- most of them were taken without the borrower completely understanding what they were getting into. They were lied to, tricked, not told the whole story, or perhaps the bad parts were in fine print and they weren't careful enough to read it.

That stuff that's in 'fine print' needs to be the first thing they find out about the loan. It needs to be in neon, flashing colors. If that was the case, you'd hardly see anyone take those loans, as it should be.

So, I don't think regulation of the actual free exchange part of the transaction is necessary. What we need is oversight just to make sure that people aren't being lied to. But that sort of government oversight is absolutely necessary.

[Kade]

Truthwarrior - that link you gave does have some good points. Fascism and socalism do have some similarities. They also have a lot of differences. Certainly, Sweden today is far different than Nazi Germany, lol. Although there are some similarities, you are correct. More differences than similarities, though.

WAIT!? He posted it!!! LMFAO!

I have him ignored, but I figured that every other post of his must be a link to that stupid paper, that he hasn't even read... lmfao... seriously... that made my day.


I called that.

[auctionguy10]

Economic freedom in the way most of you believe in it, might actually be the cause of our loss of our ability to feed and shelter ourselves... frankly.

I strongly believe the "economic freedom" of creditors to invest poorly, is going to cripple this country, in a way we have not seen before.

Well seeing as there's absolutely no reason for them not to invest poorly because they will get bailed out by the government- of course they will.

[Truth Warrior]

WHAT IS A “USEFUL IDIOT”?

A “useful idiot” is one who unwittingly aids the Socialist movement. It is purported (though unproven) that Vladimir Lenin coined the disparaging term to describe those people too damned stupid to realize that they are contributing to their own political demise. These are society’s Know-Nuttins that fasten the chain around their own necks. 99% of American citizens (both Democrats and Republicans) have been conned; they are “useful idiots” (or “Lemmings”) and they give us informed patriots (“Loose Dogs”) and our country a bad name. Michael Moore once told a German audience that Americans are “ignorant people” and that our “brains aren’t loaded down.” It’s probably the only thing that bloated, hypocritical Oscar Maddison-looking socialist ever said that I agree with.

The above was shamelessly "borrowed". ;)

[muh_roads]

Democrats do the same thing when they are in minority... SOP. Still no practical difference between the two parties.
lynn

Of course. I just wanted to point out that at least they have been trying to get the troop withdrawls started as early as the beginning of last year. If that report is true.

EDIT: btw a hardcore Obama supporter sent me the link in the OP. I'm looking for something to counter with. I figured you smart people could help me out. ;-)