Both parties face the same problems and attempt to fix them in their own ways. The line between parties is often blurred, especially during election years, and both parties have found success in their policies in the past. But, I find both parties are contradictions of themselves.

 

With glaring exceptions, Republicans want less governmental intervention in the economy but more intervention in society.

With glaring exceptions, Democrats want more governmental intervention in the economy yet less intervention in society.

 

I think Alexis De Tocqueville said this "There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle."

 

With what you see all the time today, isn't that a sign of the times?

With what you see all the time today, isn't that a sign of the times?

 

 

Considering he wrote the book about 200 years ago, we haven't changed all that much.

How about Democrats are for helping the poor, the sick, the young, the old, the crippled and maimed and discriminated, while Republicans are out to help themselves and people that look like them?

 

Or Democrats are for reasoned, responsible stewardship of our planet, while Republicans see natural resources as a means of production to be exploited.

 

Democrats are for foreign policy strategies that strengthen goodwill for America and preserves our ability to defend ourselves and others while Republicans believe that might makes right and to hell with those that won't get in line and bring 'em on.

 

The truth is, NEITHER party has a personal line to God. NEITHER party has a monopoly on ethics or righteousness. Or self righteousness for that matter.

 

One last time, just for fun:

 

The big difference between Democrats and Republicans? Democrats believe that if we all get together and bring our hammers and donate our time we can fix what's broken, and Republicans just want to know who has to pay for the nails.

:lol:

I can tell you're young!

Those liberal college teachers woked their magic on you.

Other pearls of wisdom from de Tocqueville:

 

A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.

 

America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.

 

As one digs deeper into the national character of the Americans, one sees that they have sought the value of everything in this world only in the answer to this single question: how much money will it bring in?

 

I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America.

 

In politics shared hatreds are almost always the basis of friendships

 

In the United States, the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from the necessity of forming opinions of their own.

 

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

 

The best laws cannot make a constitution work in spite of morals; morals can turn the worst laws to advantage. That is a commonplace truth, but one to which my studies are always bringing me back. It is the central point in my conception. I see it at the end of all my reflections.

 

The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of functions performed by private citizens

 

The surface of American society is covered with a layer of democratic paint, but from time to time one can see the old aristocratic colours breaking through.

 

There are two things which a democratic people will always find very difficult - to begin a war and to end it.

 

There is hardly a political question in the United States which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one.

 

 

 

When I read Democracy in America, I was astounded by the insights of a Frenchman 200 years ago, and the fact that they still hold true today.

:lol:

I can tell you're young!

Those liberal college teachers woked their magic on you.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

1) U of L's political science professors are increasingly Conservative. The most powerful professor in the department, since the death of Paul Weber and the retirement of Phil Lemley, is Gary Gregg. He runs the McConnell program, he's on the board of the Philedelphia Society, and he's a REAL Conservative. I've probably had more Conservative professors than Liberal ones.

 

2) I'm a little insulted that you think my political life started in college. I was watching Meet the Press at 3. My mother was a genuine certified commune hippyfreak, and my father was in the Navy. I've been taking part in political debate all my life. And for the record, I'm the least liberal of all the children of my family- my brother is an anarchist, and my sister is a strange amalgamation of socialist and libertarian that I can't figure out.

 

3) That said, as I get older I find myself more liberal, not less.

Presidents at the beginning of past wars:

 

World War I - Woodrow Wilson - Democrat - 116,708 KIA

World War II - Franklin Roosevelt - Democrat - 407,300 KIA

Korean War - Harry Truman - Democrat - 36,940 KIA

Vietnam War - JFK/LBJ - Democrats - 58,193 KIA

Persian Gulf War - Bush I - Republican - 299 KIA

Afghanistan War - Bush II - Republican - 370 KIA

Iraq War - Bush II - Republican - 3,236 KIA

 

Your assertion doesn't line up with my facts.

Did I say that Democrats were for pacifism? That's what the Right would have you believe.

 

Democrats are for the JUST use of force.

 

I know you list LBJ as President during Vietnam, but we aren't talking about Presidents, we're talking about parties. Would you say that Republicans today are more supportive of what we did in Vietnam, or Democrats?

Basically, Democrats have faith in government to solve problems. Republicans trust individuals to solve problems.

 

Both have it's strong points, both have their flaming failures in these mindsets.

 

 

 

Very true.

02Ram54, I know that you are more objective and contemplative than you are letting on in this thread.

 

Noone has mentioned the contextual problem of party history. Both parties have changed dramatically over time. If we are talking about the Republican and Democratic Parties, right now, today, then I would describe both parties as suffering from an internal and idealistic failure to agree on what they stand for, leaving the general public with mixed messages about past and present. I really do believe the world has passed these parties by.

I didn't realize that was the point?:sssh:

 

I tried to hint in my first post that I was playing along with the thread.

With all due respect after your ideas on Social Security how can you describe yourself as anything other then socialist?

I remember asking this question back in about the 7th or 8th grade. The answer was short and simple. The person said Republicans want to allow the people to spend their money how they want, whereas Democrats want to tell people how to spend to their money. Republicans are for bigger, stronger military with less government, while Dems are vice versa.

 

How accurate does everyone think that statement is?

That is pretty accurate. The Republicans actually give people credit for having a little sense. I would also mention that socially the Republican platform takes a pro-life stance. The democrats actually prefer to be perceived as the "fixer" of anything, come to daddy and we will give you this, that and the other . . . they are entitlement crazy. As far as socially, the democratic platform takes a pro-abortion stance. However, hopefully without sounding too pessimistic both parties have tremendous flaws and corruption abounds.

far left

DEFINITELY!!!!!:eek:

:lol:

I can tell you're young!

Those liberal college teachers woked their magic on you.

AMEN:lol:

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

1) U of L's political science professors are increasingly Conservative. The most powerful professor in the department, since the death of Paul Weber and the retirement of Phil Lemley, is Gary Gregg. He runs the McConnell program, he's on the board of the Philedelphia Society, and he's a REAL Conservative. I've probably had more Conservative professors than Liberal ones.

 

2) I'm a little insulted that you think my political life started in college. I was watching Meet the Press at 3. My mother was a genuine certified commune hippyfreak, and my father was in the Navy. I've been taking part in political debate all my life. And for the record, I'm the least liberal of all the children of my family- my brother is an anarchist, and my sister is a strange amalgamation of socialist and libertarian that I can't figure out.

 

3) That said, as I get older I find myself more liberal, not less.

As you move up the ladder, make more money and the left wants to take it from you and give it to lazy bums that live off of the system (you and I), you may find yourself starting to lean to the right. So don't be glum, there's still hope for you. :thumb:

How about Democrats are for helping the poor, the sick, the young, the old, the crippled and maimed and discriminated, while Republicans are out to help themselves and people that look like them?

 

Or Democrats are for reasoned, responsible stewardship of our planet, while Republicans see natural resources as a means of production to be exploited.

 

Democrats are for foreign policy strategies that strengthen goodwill for America and preserves our ability to defend ourselves and others while Republicans believe that might makes right and to hell with those that won't get in line and bring 'em on.

 

I hope that is in jest.....

Myself being only 20, I can't say whether this statement tends to be true or not.....

 

"If you're in your 20's and Conservative you have no heart, over 40 and Liberal you have no brain."

 

Now in no way am I trying to take any types of shot at anyone who is liberal or conservative. I'm wondering if those of you who are of a different generation than me, feel there is any truth to this statement, by that I mean, as you've gotten older have you found yourself becoming more conservative, or vice versa.