PRESIDENT KENNEDY said: "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."
Clearly the Democrat Party has changed 180 degrees.
2006-08-12 12:21:32 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Not true, the democrats would fall behind a just cause such as happened on 9/11 and we did. Bush had the whole nation behind him. But with his unwarranted war in Iraq, he has lost all democrats and many repuglicans support. Only the more mentally diminished are still supporting his corrupt and criminal government.
2006-08-12 12:26:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hard to say.
Congress has been controlled by the Republicans for the past decade. Republican presidents have been in power 22 of the past 30 years.
Carter was an embarrassment, so the Democrats lost part of their nerve somewhere between him and Kennedy.
The rest was lost along the where when a lot of the population started to hate those they called "liberals", and instead of standing up and saying that to be liberal means to respect liberty, they cowered in a corner and cried. (See a great quote by Bruno Gianelli, season 4 of the West Wing). Liberals are those who advocate liberty.
Somewhere along the way, the population stopped caring about liberty and began to be afraid. Probably as a result of the outcome of the Vietnam war, and Middle East fiascoes that cost American lives. So, they began to prefer safety and security to freedom, and that played right into the hands of the conservative movement, with its strong emphasis on defense.
And so the Democratic party lost focus, and lost drive, because they tried not to offend anyone. Which just pissed everyone off.
2006-08-12 12:25:33 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no longer person-friendly to declare. Congress has been controlled by utilising the Republicans for the previous decade. Republican presidents have been in ability 22 of the previous 30 years. Carter became a humiliation, so the Democrats lost component of their nerve someplace between him and Kennedy. the rest became lost alongside the the place whilst a good number of the inhabitants began to hate those they reported as "liberals", and intensely of status up and saying that to be liberal potential to admire liberty, they cowered in a corner and cried. (See a great quote by utilising Bruno Gianelli, season 4 of the West Wing). Liberals are people who propose liberty. someplace alongside the way, the inhabitants stopped being concerned approximately liberty and started to be afraid. in all probability as a consequence of the consequence of the Vietnam conflict, and center East fiascoes that cost American lives. So, they began to choose protection and protection to freedom, and that performed top into the arms of the conservative circulate, with its reliable emphasis on protection. And so the Democratic party lost concentration, and lostchronic, via fact they tried to no longer offend all of us. Which basically pissed everybody off.
2016-11-04 11:12:55 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It might have something to do with the fact that the Republican president let our real foes roam free and went after Iraq -- which had no WMDs and was not involved in 9/11.
Democrats will support our going after Osama. Why doesn't the president?
2006-08-12 12:28:37 · answer #4 · answered by Ranto 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
what are the Republicans doing... going to Iraq that had LITTLE TO NOTHING TO DO WITH 9-11 WHILE MAKING FRIENDS WITH SAUDI AND PAKISTAN THAT HAVE MAJOR LINKS?
and you're saying the Dems have changed... who is friends with the countries with the greatest links to 9-11... Bush and the Republicans...
read the 9-11 report... then that quote... then ask yourself why Republicans give aid to CLEAR enemy supporters...
there are a lot of people saying dems are "siding with the enemy"... WHERE... CITE IT?
the 9-11 report, produced by the government, makes the Republicans look like those that have clearly sided with those that mean us harm?
2006-08-12 12:46:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you are 100% correct....it is quite a sad thing...democrats today...won't pay any price...bear any burden..meet any hardship...support any friend...oppose any foe....today democrats...side with any foe...definitely do not support any friend...their only price is power...at the expense of Americans...they wish not to bear any burden unless it benefits their party....they bow at the altar of the ACLU...which, in its roots was a communist organization....and still carries those traits...no...the democratic party of today is, unfortunately a fringe party.
2006-08-12 12:29:40 · answer #6 · answered by bushfan88 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am a independent but have voted Republican in the last 2 elections because of who was running on the Democratic side.I vote the man not the party.The Dem's taxed me to death to give to people who cant or will not help them selves.Yes the rich get tax cuts but they put up the money to give you the job you have.The Dem's. want to take from the people who have business's& give to people who just want someone else to support them.NOT ME.I work to hard for my meager paycheck.
2006-08-12 12:41:27 · answer #7 · answered by BUTCH 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No kidding. Technically, I don't think they can be called Democrats anymore. They should go under a new name, like Lemmings, Sheepocrats, or Communistocrats.
2006-08-12 12:32:35 · answer #8 · answered by Huevos Rancheros 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The party changed when Johnson left office.
2006-08-12 12:26:40 · answer #9 · answered by lighthouse 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2004 was the first year the communist party did not have a name on the ballot for president. They backed John Kerry instead. There ya have it.
2006-08-12 12:25:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋