Democrats and Republicans: An Election Meditation
Earnest readers want to know what the difference is between the two major political parties. I have tried to provide some helpful guidance.
Democrat. Someone who believes that when people who have enjoyed a wealthy life but behaved badly get into trouble they should be rescued by non-wealthy people who have worked hard and played by the rules.
Republican. Someone who believes that when people who have enjoyed a wealthy life but behaved badly get into trouble they should be rescued by non-wealthy people who have worked hard and played by the rules.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who thinks it is good to disinherit posterity and turn the country over to the wretched refuse of the earth.
Republican. Someone who thinks it is good to disinherit posterity and turn the country over to the wretched refuse of the earth—as long as he can turn a short-term profit.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who thinks the U.S. has a right to invade any and every country to impose feminism and multiculturalism.
Republican. Someone who thinks the U.S. has a right to invade any and every country to impose feminism and multiculturalism and to get some payback—whether that particularly country has done us any harm or not and as long as the right people make some money.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who sees the future as an egalitarian, multicultural paradise for all humanity.
Republican. Someone who sees the future as an egalitarian, multicultural paradise with technological wonders and high profits.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who thinks that the Supreme Court is the instrument to impose progressive policies on a reluctant public.
Republican. Someone who thinks the Supreme Court is the instrument to impose one-man rule, as long as Republicans are in power.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who thinks abortion is a good thing.
Republican. Someone who doesn't care about abortion but has been told that saying you are against it gets votes.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who thinks the purpose of government is to provide welfare for bureaucrats, minority groups, and rich people.
Republican. Someone who thinks the purpose of government is to provide welfare for rich people, bureaucrats, and minority groups.
* * * *
Democrat. Someone who hopes that if you push affirmative action for everything you will eventually get an affirmative-action President.
Republican. Someone who can't figure out that if you push affirmative-action for everything you will eventually get an affirmative-action President.
Entries(RSS)
Here's the thing: there is always a danger of building a straw-man of 'the other side'. That means you don't have to carry on a dialogue (using empathy) to find out how bad 'they' are.
Although these shorthand descriptions are not without humor, I think it's worth mentioning that e pluribus unum involves both 'us' AND 'them'.
Dr. Wilson,
When you leave the public speechless, you know you spoke the truth. Thanks
Well, I guess I could quote the oft quoted George Wallace quote, but it goes without saying.
Here's my try:
Democrat: A Marcusian-Gramscian Marxist who hates the common man and wants to destroy him.
Republican: A Trotskyite Marxist - state capitalist who hates the common man and wants to destroy him if he can make a short term profit.
How can one be a Marxist and capitalist at the same time? Because people are full of contradictions, to which they may well be blind, or they may just be sociopathically unconcerned about such things.
Dr. Wilson,
What do you do when the only honorable option is STILL secession, and you will be nuked if you try it?
Marxist, capitalist, fascist, fundamentalist. All those Reformation/Enlightenment types look alike to me.
Spot on, Dr. Wilson. You have surpassed yourself and what usually passes for political commentary in a transcendent manner. What more needs be said about our sorry times and the loathsome political hacks lording over the fever swamp of dispossession and debasement that passes for a once great nation?
Hey hey! I'm thinking in your way Mr. Wilson!
With the Wilson's above theses in mind it's safe to say Obama represents the avant-garde nadir of American politics.
Brilliant!
#2
Well Allan, I will: there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two major partys.
Great job, Clyde. You've nailed it with some fine humor.
Democrat: Someone who thinks we should invade the Middle East (providing the Israelis approve) as long as Brown, Root and Halliburton make the money.
Republican: Someone who thinks we should invade the Middle East (providing the Israelis tell us where) as long as Halliburton and Brown, Root make the money.
Democrat: Someone who thinks that "change" means tax and spend.
Republican: Someone who thinks that "change" means tax the rich a little less and spend.
Historical note: Anyone who has studied the urban machines of a century and a half ago learned the basic principle at work here; those who have studied the administrations of FDR, Ike, and JFK know how the principle was elevated to the national level.
Clyde, you are, as my brother-in-law would say, a "piece of work." He only says that about people he admires.
It may be apocryphal, but apt natheless: "Tax and tax and tax, spend and spend and spend, elect and elect and elect."
At least until it takes a basketful of greenbacks to buy a soylent Big Mac.
"Republican. Someone who doesn’t care about abortion but has been told that saying you are against it gets votes."
That sums it up more succinctly than anything else that could be written about the GOP. It explains why so much of the South and rural West have fallen for Republican rhetoric since the '70s.
(meaning rhetoric in the negative sense)
This winner-take-all system of politics we have certainly pushes any challengers to the oligarchy to the back of the bus. So I ask: What of proportional representation as an electoral process? I recall reading a National Review article twenty years ago in which they discredited the idea, but I don't remember the specifics as to why. Would it not put a paleo or two in Congress?
Obama will be the first non-American elected president, and I was hoping it would be Arnold Schwartzeneger. October Surprise on Youtube. Prepare for a protracted Supreme Court battle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs
#15
If this is true, I am not sure that it matters a whole lot. We do not live in a time when even the unavoidable explicit letter of the U. S. Constitution is followed. Imagine this scenario: Sen. Obama wins an undisputed election--the first one in 8 years and is the first minority[AFRICAN-american!!??] to be elected. Does anyone really think it would be possible to rescind his election? I think the L. A. riots would look like a polo match. Sen. Obama knows that there would be hell to pay after the election if an attempt is made to delegitimise him. One of the most insane and foolish things in the world to do is to play the race/class card. This is especially dangerous in times of economic instability. Since it has been, I think that we are sitting on top of a powder keg, there are gasoline vapors around, and someone wants to light up.
May the Lord be gracious and save us from our folly!
CHRONICLES readers should be particularly mindful concerning Samuel Francis's description of American politics being dominated by two parties: the stupid party and the evil party, which periodically get together to do something both stupid and evil, this process being known as "bipartisanship".
One question for the panel. The kid that got beat up in his highschool because he was putting up a political sign, in your opinion, got beat by a Republican or by a Democrat?
As regards civil affairs, experience has shown how important it is that the citizens should be upright and virtuous. In a free State, unless justice be generally cultivated, unless the people be repeatedly and diligently urged to observe the precepts and laws of the Gospel, liberty itself may be pernicious. Let those of the clergy, therefore, who are occupied with the instruction of the multitude, treat plainly this topic of the duties of citizens, so that all may understand and feel the necessity, in political life, of conscientiousness, self restraint, and integrity; for that cannot be lawful in public which is unlawful in private affairs.
LONGINQUA
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON
CATHOLICISM IN THE
UNITED STATES
Conscientiousness, self restraint, and integrity seem to be missing from both parties.
@16
Brian, you're absolutely right. I have the rifles and the bullets, and I'm working on the garden. I intend to witness a spectacular floor show.
@17 RJ
While Sam enjoyed that quote, it was originally John Stuart Mill who said that to describe England's Whigs and Tories at the height of their empire.
The Democrats are about power and money, whereas the Republicans are the reverse. They're about money and power.
Democrat: See "Republican."
Republican: See "Democrat."
Republican: someone who wants to bomb the world into America's image
Democrat: someone who wants the Republicans to bomb the world into America's image
Is it strange to anyone how warmly candidates embrace one another just before (and after) the demonization takes place? Perhaps an insight into how things really operate. If I believed it were civility I might be encouraged. As it is, I think we vicariously are given a glimpse into the devil's workshop.
The problem is --
Republican versus Democrat is the only game in town.
America is the most ideologically driven power since the Soviet Union.
@22 polemicscat
But it's such a lousy game to watch, the best hope for entertainment is to wait for a fight to break out in the bleachers. Of course, that's exactly what the elitist officials want -- a distraction so that they can accuse us of not paying attention.
We are paying attention to a crooked roulette game that is done without any panche whatsoever. It's a bit like being mugged and giving up your wallet while providing no resistance whatsoever.
Absolutely brilliant!
It's funny watching "conservatives" elsewhere come up with excuses to vote McCain: nearly everything wrong with Obama is also wrong with McCain!
---
Allen Wilson calls Republicans Trotskyites. If neoconservatism is at core Trotskyite, then it has been a HUGE success. God save us.
The best satire I have read in a long time. Sad thing is, it really isn't satire is it? Allen Wilson at reply #3 also had a nice add on with the Trotskyite label of the GOP. Still can't believe the millions of members of the Christian Right that can't see that they are being set up for total annihilation by backing members of the secualr left. Almost has me being ashamed of being a Christian!
Democrat - one who is in favor of trampling the rights of the ppl while his rights are protected
Republican - see above
Republican - one who feels that any attacks he makes on the Constitution are for the good of the nation and her ppl
Democrat - see above
Congresscritters should be made to wear colored blazers like those worn by traders in the pit so that CSpan viewers could tell one party's players from the others.
I posted this earlier on this site, but I am re-posting here and expanding a bit. I urge all readers to write in my name for President. My platform? Bring the troops home and have them arrest all congressmen, party hacks, neo-con advisors (regardless of whether they are still in government or are now making millions of dollars screwing up other areas of the world, e.g., Wolfowitz) and give them an ultimatum: leave the country or I will hang every last one of you. I reserved this platform for congressmen in my earlier post, but I felt the need to have more DIVERSITY in my program.