Democrats versus Republicans

[chris_gee]

Tee hee, you all got sucked in.

[wind_magic]

Okay, I'll make a story too ...

One day a Republican and a Democrat were walking down the road. They came upon a group of independent minded villagers who were doing whatever it is that people do, basically minding their own business. The Republican started telling the villagers about all the dangers in the world, the need to be strong and protect ourselves, increase border security with the neighboring kingdoms, etc. The Democrat started telling them how the Republican was wrong and that it was more important to put universal health care in place, increase funding to education, etc. The Republican countered that no, it was in fact the Democrat who was not only wrong, but stupid, and then the two of them got into a big argument which eventually turned into a street fight. People everywhere started taking sides and joining in and the group of people in the village became divided about in half.

And then the Republican and the Democrat pocketed lots of money from the villagers and put in place a program called "taxes" to make sure the villagers kept sending them money every year. Then the Republican and Democrat left the village with money jingling in their pockets to go to the next village ... and snickered to themselves and started talking about what they were going to have for dinner that night and how they were going to modify the show to keep everyone on edge and interested. And the villagers continued to be divided and kept arguing with each other and kept sending their money to the Republican and Democrat.

And the Republican and Democrat lived happily ever after.

And the independent minded villagers turned into a bunch of political party zombies who couldn't think for themselves anymore.

The End.

[RAGNAR]

lll

[sailaway21]

Rags,
My advise to you is to not attempt to talk to Belgians about defense policy>(g)

As for the schools. There are some different types of education going on there these days. see my post in the ass thread

[RAGNAR]

bbb

[STARWINDY]

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

Gingrich puts Congress in perspective:

YouTube - Contest Announcement

That was a treat. I think that is more accurate than most views out there.

[RAGNAR]

bbb

[capecodphyllis]

Democrats versus Republicans?

Let us examine Liberal definitions vs. the actual truth:

Exploitation: According to liberals, the ill-use of others for one's own economic ends; actually, the willing and mutually-profitable interaction of buyers and sellers in a free labor market.

Capitalist: According to liberals, a greedy exploiter of the labor of others; actually, someone who pays workers' salaries and attempts to please consumers by risking his capital and using his natural talents.

Fascism: According to liberals, a horrible totalitarian government having elements of the free-enterprise system which makes it even more horrible; actually, any government which socialists dislike, this dislike usually being proportional to the amount of freedom the government allows its citizens.

Welfare: According to liberals, help for the needy; actually, a way of enslaving the poor to bad habits, lack of education, absence of ambition, a desire for drugs to fill the empty hours, and -- above all -- dependence on Big Government and the liberal politicians who run it.

Mean-spirited: According to liberals, someone who is indifferent to the suffering of others, or who enjoys it; actually, someone who believes that society's failures are not automatically entitled to other people's money.

Compassion: According to liberals, a desire to help the less-fortunate; actually, support for the politicians who tax, tax, tax and spend, spend, spend in order to pay off their political constituencies and keep themselves in power.

Social justice: According to liberals, taxing the fortunate rich or denying them some of their privileges in order to help the unfortunate poor; actually, penalizing productive people in order to reward unproductive ones.

Rights: According to liberals, the powers given by the Constitution; actually, the penumbras which shroud the Constitution in darkness and give special privileges to certain favored groups.

Equality: According to liberals, what all men have; actually, what all men don't have.

Discrimination: According to liberals, a horrible crime in which certain groups are treated unjustly and as inferiors for no good reason; actually, a natural reaction of reluctance by the members of one group to interact or mix with the members of a different group, usually because the two groups are different, it being natural for people to seek out others of their own kind.

Prejudice/Bigotry: According to liberals, an irrational dislike of the members of another group; actually, a sensible reaction of suspicion to those with whom one is unacquainted, or a rational reaction to the warnings which one has received from trusted persons about the members of certain groups.

Racism: According to liberals, hating others because of their skin tone; actually, having the sense to see that skin color is a marker of often- profound differences which lead people to take account of those differences -- differences which reinforce the natural desire of each person to live, work, marry and mingle with his own kind.

Sexism: According to liberals, unfairly discriminating against women or holding them in low regard; actually, recognizing women's limitations and behaving accordingly.

Antisemitism: According to liberals, an irrational dislike of Jews; actually, a recognition that Jews as a group have a different and competing agenda from gentiles, and that Jewish influence over social policies -- from gun control and anti-'hate' laws to civil rights and communism -- has created an important threat to America and Western civilization.

Homophobia: According to liberals, an irrational fear or dislike of homosexuals; actually, a very rational fear and dislike of homosexuals because of AIDS and unwelcome behavior patterns.

Affirmative action: According to liberals, a policy intended to make up for the evils of past discrimination; actually, a program of official discrimination against whites and males, made as a payoff to liberals' minority constituencies.

Multiculturalism: According to liberals, the necessity of having a society composed of many different ethnic, racial and sexual types in order to make people see that 'the only real race is the human race'; actually, a formula for social unrest and chronic unhappiness as a result of different ethnic, racial and sexual minorities all vying with one another for power and influence and hating each other as a result.

Intolerance: According to liberals, an irrational refusal to interact with others, usually because they belong to a different group; actually, the courage to stand up to liberal bullying and exercise one's right of free association.

Extremist: According to liberals, a wild-eyed bomb-throwing cross- burning hate-filled government-bashing rabble-rousing gun-loving lunatic; actually, a sensible person who wishes to preserve his culture, his country and his race, and who therefore does not appreciate having his nation, his own neighborhood or his own business overrun by alien hordes, druggies, welfarites, criminals, voodooists, homosexuals, AIDS carriers, or any of the other "diverse" groups which liberals are so assiduous in championing.

Hate: According to liberals, an undesirably-negative state of mind, usually exhibited for no good reason toward members of groups to which one does not belong; actually, the kind of emotion which sensible people exhibit toward bad things (as they might exhibit toward blacks because of their high crime rate and low achievement level), and which liberals exhibit in tremendous abundance toward anyone who questions their dogmas.

Love: According to liberals, what everyone should have toward everyone else, and particularly toward the inferior, the degenerate, and the degraded, especially if they come with an off-color skin or off-color sexuality; actually, a feeling which one can have at most for only a few special people, thus leading us to conclude that when liberals say they love everyone, they actually love no one, and -- given the results of their policies -- it is no surprise that the feeling is mutual.

[seabreeze_97]

The Dems and Repubs agree on one thing, "Run Hillary, Run!" bumper stickers.
Democrats have 'em on the back bumper, Republicans have them on their front!

[sailaway21]

Random thoughts occuring while cleaning the varnish brushes:

I hear a lot of complaints about the government, and the president in particular. The one that never rings true to me is the, "they're all the same, dem or rep". The red headed step-child to that one is, "two partys don't work, they're both the same, we need more political partys".

The latter is not prohibited by any means, John Anderson call your office, but the lack of viable third parties brings out an important point. The party has a moderating influence on the canidates, and, ultimately, the type of person who gets elected. Winning a party's nomination is a difficult and time intensive prospect. The prospective canidate must court the various factions within their party, endeavoring to alienate none, while staying true to their convictions. That process calls for maturity, diplomacy, and a very strong sense of who you are. All desirable qualities in a nominee. Contrast that with the changes we are currently seeing in France. The new president's mandate lasted less than a week, with the unexpected success of the socialist parliamentarians. France is always forming a new government, charging off in some new direction. Interesting, but not very stable. The US, on the other hand, is relatively slow to change. By the time change occurs, what might have started out as a Republican idea becomes a Democratic signed law. Bill Clinton with welfare reform comes to mind. Now that makes our government frustrating, and slower than molasses, but it also serves as a brake on some pretty hare-brained ideas. Third party canidates often have a bushel basket full of hare-brained ideas. If they all got elected, you could see some interesting coalitions forming. The seperatists would agree to ban automobiles if the greens would agree to segregate public schools. Working big ideas through the party structure tends to take the rough edges off those ideas, with the kooky ones falling by the wayside.

Now to the "they're all the same" complaint. They are demonstrably not all the same and, in fact, we are now engaged in the highlighting of their differences. Near as I can tell, there are about 8 canidates seeking each party's nomination for the '08 presidential election. Are the people who claim their "sameness" watching, questioning, or campaigning for their most desirable canidate? If they are not, they have no right to complain. Now I know that the misguided efforts at campaign finance reform have limited the individual's free speech rights in this regard, but there is still much that can be done for "your" canidate today. Or, are you going to wait until the field is winnowed down to two and pronounce them both the same, yet again?

The canidates chosen reflect the will of the people. The will of the people who are willing to get involved. It's funny how we love to carp and yet most of us do not contribute to the party of our choice, or their canidate, just like we are not contributing to the canidate of our choice in this early election season. We whine, "my vote doesn't count" or "what will my ten bucks do to help?" Well, based on the last two presidential elections, your vote and your money would probably have made a big difference, assuming a few like-minded individuals acted as well. How do you win big in an election or how do you amass a large campaign fund? One vote, or one donation, at a time.

Don't carp too much about your elected representative or the President. By the time that the 50% of the populace who bothered to vote elected them, their positions and track records were pretty well known to all who cared to know. If you are part of the 50% who did not vote, I understand that "American Idol" was much more interesting and I'll make you a deal. I won't talk to you about "American Idol", something I know nothing about, if you do not talk to me about politics and government. For those who did vote, the other 50%, and things didn't turn out much to your liking, have you considered that, perhaps, you did not get involved enough? Was your only obligation to pull a lever? Are you, perhaps, one of those people who will be around to see and criticize the final result, but were nowhere to be found while the heavy lifting was being done? I mean, it's not like we're talking about the NFL draft here, where we can all imagine ourselves being "owner for a day". This is a republican democracy and this is how we determine how our country is going to be run. If ya got a problem with the engineer and the railroad, carping in the caboose may be entertaining, but it doesn't have much effect on the train.

Do you make your own decisions in your life? Or do you let someone else do that for you, say Mom or Dad? Well, if you are not voting, or not involved with the party or canidate of your liking, any party, any canidate, then you are letting someone else make your decisions for you. Someone you may not like or respect very much. And your actions state, "whatever you guy's decide is fine with me".

And, if you think it is all pre-determined by the big boys in the parties, I'd encourage you to call up the party of your choice and volunteer. You'll find that, no they don't have nearly enough money or volunteers to get their message out and, yes they can certainly use your help. And, if you meet one of the "big boys" and ask him how he got to be a big boy, chances are he will tell you, "just like you, by volunteering and getting involved". Politics ain't just in the history books, a new chapter is being written daily, and you're either in or you're out. If you're out, you'll have to wait for the next history book to come out to find out what happened.

Those of you still with me will no doubt be relieved that the varnishing is done for the season.(g)