do democrats only want power? do they really not care about the issues?

Question

we the democratic party believe in what you believe but not too strongly. we promise to take your side of this issue unless you change your mind or if it will make the republicans look good. we are no longer liberals we are prgressives. and when that gets figured out we will be something else. we will not have ideas just slogans and finger pointing. we can do better how? we dont know. but we will figure it out if we get elected. we will not raise taxes until we get in power then we will rethink the issue and make a tuff choice to raise taxes. but we will always have your opinion unless you change your mind then we will too change our minds or if it gets too tuff the we will also change. we are a party of change. change our minds, change our views, change our nickname, change what remember on that subject.

and blame bush, yeah do not forget that blame bush.

i remeber a time that dems were so for this war man go get them and all of a sudden it is wrong for oil we were lied to. hmm

dem quotes on the war http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1172331/posts

Answer 1

The Democrats problems are they are for and against EVERYTHING. I cant trust a party that has Hilliary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi or Margret Boxer in it.

Answer 2

Why don't we try looking at numbers (and this is from Forbes magazine - not "the liberal media").

Post War Presidents and prosperity:
GDP Growth: 1 - Johnson (D), 2 - Kennedy (D), 3 - Clinton (D)

Disposable Income Growth: 1 - Johnson (D), 2 - Kennedy (D), 3 - Nixon (R)

Unemployment: 1 - Kennedy (D), 2 - Clinton (D), 3 - Johnson (D)

Deficit Reduction: 1 - Clinton (D), 2 - Ford (R), 3 - Truman (R)

And this one even surprised me...
Job Creation: 1 - Carter (D), 2 - Clinton (D), 3 - Reagan (R)

Where would W rank in most of these? Not on the bottom, but near it.

Oh, and Reagan? He cut taxes in 1981, but what gets left out of the history books is that in 1982 after realizing that the cuts were causing massive deficits and that the numbers used to justify the cuts were wrong, he signed the bill rolling back nearly a third of the cuts - in comparison to GDP the tax hike was greater than Clinton '93 tax hike. In the 1983 Social Security Reform Act, Reagan authorized yet another tax hike - this time an increase in payroll taxes. The average net tax burden on citizens increased from 17.7% of income to 18.4% of income.

And if Bush and company had execute the war properly, maybe people wouldn't be so against it. Remember the general public was for the war and is now against it.

Answer 3

regrettably, it truly is only politics in the present day. we've needed health care reform for a lengthy time period. each and each and every time the monetary equipment tanks, the talk comes up because households lose their insurance even as the significant salary earner loses their interest. I bear in mind my health care specialist speaking about it contained in the 80's, and then there became the attempt at reform that became shot down contained in the ninety's. even as the Republicans killed it decrease back then they saved putting forward there have been all sorts of issues shall we do. Tax credit, increasing the COBRA eligibility. None of it occurred. as quickly because it became killed, and Bush took the white living house it did not arise till Obama. i don't believe the Republicans are keen to take area. The concept that they have got not been consulted isn't authentic. they don't have any purpose of doing some thing yet preventing progression. it truly is time to provide up this petty crap. we commit to ultimately address the priority. i believe it is going to ensue, and it ought to probably no longer be via Republicans. clone of Medicare, Democrats ought to bypass it on my own in this. And adequate of the Democrats what to regulate healh care. it truly is a drained previous top wing speaking element.

Answer 4

What is funny and sad about your question and comments, is that they are coming straight off the TV. You are a victim of the media. They have even convinced you that the media is a leftist machine. You think democrats label themselves? No.

I am not gonna tell you you are wrong and that you should vote Democrat though. In all honesty, the two "sides" have the same agenda, using different platforms and appealing to different emotions to get to the same place.

Here is a synonym:

Two radio stations, in the same city and broadcast area, playing almost the same music, competing against each other and calling the other one names, and insisting they are better than the other. OK, but underneath, they are both owned by the same company (i.e. Clear Channel, etc...) and are sponsored by the same sponsors, are supported by the same advertisers, and talk about the same topics.

Tell me what is the difference between this and our government?

Answer 5

Of course its about power-why do you think the democrats want 12mill. illegals to be given amnesty?Answer-- because they believe they will get the votes-why is there a problem with the republicans making sure the voter rights bill cannot be used so illegals can vote-Because the Dems. don't care if your a citizen as long as you don't vote republican-Its a means to an end the Democrats could careless about this country.

Answer 6

you can't judge a group by a few, and you cannot make a sweeping judgement about a group that is so fractured. remember, there are republicans who don't support the war or the president, and there are those who rabidly do. does this mean they can't make up their mind? no, it's just differing opinions of individuals.
personally, i do want liberals and progressives to gain power. i want taxes raised. i want *my* taxes raised. i want to actually have a foreign policy. i want equality before the law. my stances are clear. i am a democrat.

Answer 7

Sorry this is so long but I just can't be still when I see these things happening!

No matter how noble the motivations of political leaders are, when they achieve positions of power the power itself inevitably becomes their driving force. Government officials too often yield to the temptations and corrupting influences of power..But there are many others who are not bashful about using government
power to do "good." They truly believe they can make the economy fair through a redistributive tax and spending system; make the people moral by regulating personal behavior and choices; and remake the world in our image using armies. They argue that the use of force to achieve good is legitimate and proper for government-- always speaking of the noble
goals while ignoring the inevitable failures and evils caused by coercion.Not only do they justify government force, they believe they have a moral obligation to do so.
Once we concede government has this "legitimate" function and can be manipulated by a majority vote, the various special interests move in quickly. They gain control to direct government largesse for their own benefit. Too often it is corporate interests who learn how to manipulate every contract, regulation and tax policy. Likewise, promoters of the"progressive" agenda, always hostile to property rights, compete for government power through safety, health, and environmental initiatives.Both groups resort to using government power-- and abuse this power--
in an effort to serve their narrow interests. In the meantime,
constitutional limits on power and its mandate to protect liberty are totally forgotten.Since the use of power to achieve political ends is accepted, pervasive,and ever expanding, popular support for various programs is achieved by"creating fear". Sometimes the fear is concocted out of thin air, but usually it's created by wildly exaggerating a problem or incident that
does not warrant the proposed government "solution." Often government caused the problem in the first place". The irony, of course, is that government action rarely solves any problem, but rather worsens existing problems or creates altogether new ones.Fear is generated to garner popular support for the proposed government action, even when some liberty has to be sacrificed. This leads to a society that is systemically driven toward fear-- fear that gives the monstrous government more and more authority and control over our lives and property.
Fear is constantly generated by politicians to rally the support of the people.
Environmentalists go back and forth, from warning about a coming ice age to arguing the grave dangers of global warming.
It is said that without an economic safety net-- for everyone, from
cradle to grave - people would starve and many would become homeless.
It is said that without government health care, the poor would not
receive treatment. Medical care would be available only to the rich.
Without federal assistance, there would be no funds for public
education,and the quality of our public schools would diminish-- ignoring recent history to the contrary.
It is argued that without government surveillance of every American, even without search warrants, security cannot be achieved. The sacrifice of some liberty is required for security of our citizens, they claim.We are constantly told that the next terrorist attack could come at any moment. Rather than questioning why we might be attacked, this atmosphere
of fear instead prompts giving up liberty and privacy. 9/11 has been "conveniently" used to generate the fear necessary to expand both our foreign intervention and domestic surveillance.
In all instances where fear is generated and used to expand government control, it's safe to say the problems behind the fears were not caused by the free market economy, or too much privacy, or excessive liberty.
It's easy to generate fear, fear that too often becomes excessive,
unrealistic, and difficult to curb. This is important: It leads to even
more demands for government action than the perpetrators of the fear actually anticipated.

Will the "people " wake up before it is too late? We are teatering on the edge of"the point of no return"

Answer 8

Originally every democrat really cares in their heart for the under priveleged or the difficulties of a minority. However there is no choice but to combine their issue with another minority issue, so much that the democrats represent no group because they try to represent every group

Answer 9

More spin from not a real man,only a puppet of the Right.
Nice life you got there.Can I be like you??

Most Democrats voters were never for this war for oil.
Yet you'd be willing to lie online.Hmmm.

I'd expect as much from a hateful supestitious hypocrite like you.
Oh I forgot,you're too dense to be able to PRONOUNCE "superstitious".

Answer 10

You just described the republican party to a tee. Good Job!