2007-04-23 09:12:17 · 11 answers · asked by baby1 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
correction...democratic party...somehow someone thought that was prudent that I correct.
2007-04-23 09:21:10 · update #1
I disagree with your assumption. It seems to me the Dem party is becoming more about personal freedom/civil liberties and less about social services.
2007-04-23 09:19:30 · answer #1 · answered by Bryan H 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Hey you know what?! When they get right into bed with someone that wants to "regulate" how many squares of TOILET PAPER I use, then yes I'd say they are dangerous to our way of life!
Everyone is laughing over how "kookie" Crows statements are, but I assure you they are only a little more out of the realm of what these people are after.
There's a state rep that wants to regulate the sale of baking soda . . . there are police peeping into bathroom stalls (some people were upset by this, so now the debate is over cameras and if we should have an expectation to privacy in a public restroom) . . . my sinus medicine went from $1 to $5+ because some people like to get high on it . . . and the list goes on!
The idea's these people bring are dangerous to liberty. We should have the right to make decisions for ourselves, even bad ones.
2007-04-23 20:56:32 · answer #2 · answered by Moneta_Lucina 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
McCarthy, like 99.9% of Americans, didn't/wouldn't know a socialist if they ate one. The Democratic party is in no danger of approaching accusations of being "socialist". Take a look at the rest of world political scene and you'd see how laughable the idea of the democrats being "socialist" really is.
2007-04-23 10:54:28 · answer #3 · answered by russ_in_mo 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I think the McCarthy era is held up too often, and not really relevant to today. It was a big deal, because it was an early victory of media over goverment (though the real tipping point was Watergate), and, obviously, of liberals over conservatives, so it's gained this sort of hallowed status in history.
2007-04-23 09:20:10 · answer #4 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Which one? Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin, the drunken bully who never exposed a single Communist? Or Gene McCarthy of Minnesota, the self-absorbed "poet Senator" who never met a TV camera he didn't like or a Kennedy he did?
It's "the Democratic Party," not "the Democrat Party," and you don't have a clue as to what socialism is. Look up Canada's "New Democratic Party," at www.ndp.ca, and you'll see what North American Socialism really looks like.
2007-04-23 09:18:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
Each year we find that the blustery senator was more right than wrong. His presentatation and methods turned many off including Judge Welch, but, all in all, there were communists in government then and today where they are termed liberals.
2007-04-23 10:06:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Your question assumes an erroneous claim.
The democratic party is not turning more socialist. Both of the major parties have become more fascist/corporatist.
2007-04-23 09:55:21 · answer #7 · answered by Old Uncle Dave 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Not really, but let's remember who McCarthy's right hand man was: Bobby Kennedy.
2007-04-23 09:16:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Bingo
They are not, but the party and their members of congress are all Socialists.
Wake up AMerica, this is the enemy within.
2007-04-23 09:18:46 · answer #9 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Democrat (adj., n.), Democratic (adj.)
+
2007-04-23 09:27:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋