Juana!

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

1. they like to give other's people money to poor people in exchange of power
2. they live richer lives and giving other people's money to poor people makes the feel right
3. ?????

what do you think they love the poor and "opressed" to much? also how many of them do you know have or had real jobs before they start sucking government money?

Wayne Brady

That's like saying the republicans hold down the poor so the rich can get richer. None of those statements are wholeheartedly true. The democratic party has a long history in populous politics. The South was doggedly democratic up until the Civil Rights Act. That's when republicans(like Nixon) started to cash in on the discontent of so many southerners, and slowly started turning the South in to a republican stronghold. There are still people in these part who will vote democrat till the day they die because 'that's the way they were brought up". Their usually the dirt poor (some would say "trailer park trash"), working-class living in the rural South, and they all don't suck the gov't for money.

Juana!

but how come the democratic party is based in socializing the governement ggiving away things and money that do not belong to them while they get richer and richer...

i grant you republicans love rich people... they want everyone to be rich... but democrats they only want people to be poor and them to be the rich... ask ed kennedy or kerry or any of those reverends (another synonim for i never had a job in my life)...

Wayne Brady

The Democratic Party may seem like it's based solely on socializing the gov't, but that tradition only goes back to FDR and the New Deal. Many democrats will die democrats because of what FDR did for this country during the Great Depression.
But for the Kennedy's their loyalty to the party goes back even farther. There was a time in this country when Irish immigrants were discriminated against. The Democratic Party championed there cause. Edward Kennedy's grandfather use to be one of those dirt poor immigrants before he became a successful businessman.
As for the reverends, I don't know of any that are democrats except for the black preachers. With the exception of Jesse Jackson, I don't think it's all about getting richer. I truly think it's about helping others who are not as fortunate.

bleh123

its fucking bullshit democrats love poor people. I strongly believe Clinton was the best Republican president we've had in a while. Yes, I said republican for a reason, take a look at Clinton's spening. Think about this math for a second people, SOviet Union collapses and there is no longer a major threat to America. The general popular concesnsus was to cut spending on the military. Half a trillion dollars was been spent on the military in 1992....In 2000? ohhhh, just about the same number of bucks. Why not take $400,000,000,000 from the military and place it into shelters for homeless, universal healthcare (Im no expert, but 400 billion certainly well help those that dont have insurance or healthcare of anysort; true fact: 1 in 3 children are not insured.) Also, in 1995, in order to save money, he cut life-time benefits to only 5 years max and then the person was on his/her own. In correction to the question, the Democrats PRETEND to love poor people, but corporations have their dicks in their asses the same as the Republicans. I reiterate myself from a different topic: I HATE ALL POLITICIANS. Unless your John McCain or some other person Ill make exceptions for.

0 snowman 0

O.k. I've been called a facist I'm so friggin right on this issue; and I mean right as in ideological spectrum. . .I'm wasn't sure that was clear, so what the hell. I've been raised pretty much on self-reliance/dependance my entire life. It's not because of my lifestyle because my parents were and are pretty well-off, pretty much held no punches concerning my education and made sure I didn't do anything stupid. I'm not like a "have it all, spoiled brat" person and I've kept a "what you need, not what you want" lifestyle since I was in highschool. I can't really say "why don't people just suck it up and work like this country did in the 1920's-1960's" or "too bad" or "tough it out" because of my lifestyle. But it's no one elses fault (and it may not be your fault either) you are in the position you're in. "Well he/she was born into poverty" Then the parents shouldn't have had a child. If you can't support one, don't have one. "There are no jobs/I'm unemployed" There are jobs. Maybe they're shitty, maybe they don't pay much, but they pay. My job may not be cleaning the elephant cages at the local zoo, but I'm not entirely happy with it. I also stick with it to pay the bills, though. Of course there are exceptions to this and like I said in a another thread, there is some compassion in government. The married couple who was doing o.k. and supporting themselves and then dad keeps getting plastered and runs off with some hooker named Trixie and leaves mom with three kids and she's screwed and ends up working three jobs to get by and needs a hand. . .SURE! You got it! Help is on the way! Unfortunately, the government does not moderate where aid to people in this country goes closely enough and X% of the population getting welfare, medicaid, etc. is manipulating the system and screwing everyone else. There's too much else I could put in here, whether it's right or wrong, but I can't think so knock yourselves out. AND I HATE IT WHEN YOU'VE BEEN TYPING FOR SO LONG AND THE THING SIGNS YOU OUT AND YOU GOTTA WRITE ANOTHER DAMN RESPONSE.

davemo2us

Simple. Demon-cats are the party of entitlements and therefore who better to pander to.

Jimi

Instead of name-calling and emotional retort, why don't you actually, for once, give some kind of educated answer and then provide a basis for your statements?

davemo2us

it was other than the demon-cats part.

davemo2us

And as you so found of saying either add to the thread or head out.

Jimi

there was nothing educated in that post. It was sterotypical and unbased.

davemo2us

What you haven't heard of summarizing?

Jimi

That wasn't a summarization of anything. Debating with you is like debating with a retarded monkey. It's accomplishing nothing, and you're adding nothing that makes any sense. Therefore, I'll leave this particular debate, unless something intelligent is said.

davemo2us

Oh that's good retarded monkey that's quick.