Why can't they just admit there were skeletons in the closet years before they were born? Stuff that has nothing to do with them now (slavery). Why must there always be someone to blame? Now they've "swapped" with Republicans. The blame game is what costs Dem votes.
2006-10-30 13:53:16 · 6 answers · asked by MEL T 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
not me: It's a "fact" they've "swapped". I think not. That's a political belief aimed to blame Republican for slaver and make the Dems seem like they're a member of a party that was always progressive. Which is a lie.
2006-10-30 14:00:41 · update #1
Huh?
Like any group that wants to remain relevant and useful over a long period of time, the Democratic party has changed over the years to reflect the changes in the US. Issues that originally motivated the formation of the party were non-existant later on, as the country and world changed. What most people today consider the Democratic party only really took shape during the FDR administration, when the party became known for its positions on social justice, liberalism, and concern for the "common man."
Neither the Republican nor Democratic parties of today bear any resemblance to their 1850's selves, when slavery was an issue.
2006-10-30 14:12:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Great point, and being that this is an election year there are no "pulled punches" The left blames the Republicans for their "sins" while at the same time forgetting the "skeletons in their own closet." Admitting a failure is not human nature, Lying is!! Foley (not defending him) is a sick man. He should have to pay for what he did, but the man resigned from office, Did Gerry Studds, no, did Ted Kennedy, no, even Bill Clinton, no. The democrats (and their views) would be respected a little more if they admitted their skeletons!!!!
2006-10-30 14:13:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Democratic party is spineless at times, and its not the blue-collar party anymore. In actually, the republican represent the working male more than the democrat party in 2006. The reason is feminism creep into the democratic party, support of abortion turned off a lot voters, support of gun-control turn away a lot of blue collar workers. The democratic party get back to the blue-collar roots they can take on republicans, but that wont happen since the democrats would have to do a 180 on a social issues. Blue Dog democrats if they are still around I vote for one that is pro-worker, but also pro-gun, pro-American. Blue Dog democrats will be as upset as right-wing republicans for burning the American flag, and for giving favours out trail lawyers.
2006-10-30 14:21:41 · answer #3 · answered by ram456456 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its the revisionist history in our schools.
White man bad. If white man has money, then white man must have stolen it from somebody else.
Liberal blood-guilt is a costly thing, I'm afraid. It has taken away our ability to be proud of our nation and our accomplishments.
I can't find a time in the entire history of the world that wasn't bloody.
Not to endorse blood-shed, of course. But humans are not very nice.
2006-10-30 14:03:06 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Seems to me Lincoln freed the slaves, and if my memory serves me correctly, he was a Republican too! Oh yeah, and he supported the war effort. A Liberal would have said we've been in the south for too long, lets just pull out before the job is done! Oh please. Liberals don't know what they believe
2006-10-30 14:07:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Oh please. Who's blaming? Facts are facts. If I recall correctly it was the cons who started it.
I stand by my statement. Mr PhD proves the point.
2006-10-30 13:59:23 · answer #6 · answered by notme 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋