February 13, 2013
-
Did Republicans and Democrats Switch Places?
I feel compelled to address this issue because it is a common myth among liberals which they freqently take for an axiom and bring it up in debates. Did Republicans and Democrats ever swith places or flip? The answer is emphatically no.
The Republicans were never a liberal party. Out of the two parties they have always been the one which was more pro-Constitution. The biggest problem with the Republicans today is that they are going along with the Democrats, which means that they are essentially seat warmers in DC, at best.
The Democrats of the past were pro-slavery, and the Democrats of today are pro-abortion. In either case the Democrats and much of their constituency violated the natural rights of a large segment of the population, based on subjective arguments on how they are less than human.
I am not going to argue that some people are better off never being born, because that has no bearing on the issue of whether or not abortion is murder. I am not going to argue that in the long run the descendents of the black Africans brought to the US as slaves are not better off than their cousins in Africa, they are, but that has no bearing on whether or not the institution of slavery is morally valid. But the Democrat party does have a history of interpreting the Constitution subjectively.
In addition, I am 100% convinced that if the majority of liberals today were born back then they would be pro-slavery, because their tendency to subscribe to subjective party arguments about one segment of the population being less than human would still be there. The Democrats of today are still pro-slavery to a certain degree with the way they want to tell us what to eat, what medical treatments we can have, where to go to school, what sort of education we can have, and so on and so forth.
I don’t want to hear about how the South was full of Christian conservatives. The colonies founded for religious reasons were all to the north. The southern colonies were established for the same reason that the colonies in Haiti and Cuba were established, which was mass production of cash crops. Today there are very few Christian conservatives in the northeast, and the northeast is mostly Democrat as a result. That is not to say that there were no Christian conservatives in the south, because there were, but they were not the rich plantation owners who held most of the political influence. However, I am not going to say that the south was completely wrong, or that all of their reasons for secession were invalid. I still agree with secession, and so did Robert E. Lee, who incidentally was also anti-slavery.
But the whole myth about the parties switching sides is just that, a myth. The Democrats have simply changed their angle of attack, and the Republicans have decided to go along with them more and more. If anything what we see happening is the differences between the parties becoming smaller and smaller, which is why I am probably going to completely stop voting for the Republicans fairly soon. Last time the only one I voted for was Romney, and I voted libertarian for all the rest, of course, at that point it didn’t matter since they threw out my ballot.
Comments (51)
gross generalizations anyone?
After the NRC this year, and the dishonesty there, I knew the republicans were lost to me.
What do you mean they “threw out your ballot”? Were you in one of those districs reporting over 100% turnout, with 100% of the votes for Obama?
@davidian - you can’t talk about demographics without making generalizations.
@mtngirlsouth - No. They literally threw out my ballot and sent me a letter saying that they didn’t count it. It was very ballzy of them, and unConstitutional.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - WOW. Do you still have the letter?
@davidian -
Aside from the truth of Rex’s response to your comment, can you clearly articulate why a generalization is inherently inapplicable? You say it like an accusation, as many people do when they have no substantive rebuttal, so whats the accusation, specifically?
Where, in relation to the argument of this post, is the offense of a generalization?
@mtngirlsouth - The letter, as well as my actual voter registration card, are in the house, somewhere. If you want to see what it was they sent I could probably find it, but I didn’t want to post it publicly on Xanga for privacy reasons. I have to protect my identity.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - This is something the public should know about. I was going to suggest you call in a radio show I listen to a lot, that is national, and tell them about this. It is the Hagmann & Hagmann report. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cfp-radio They are on weeknights from 8-11 EST. They can get this out. But I can understand you not wanting to draw attention to yourself.
I don’t think that they’ve necessarily switched either. I think that at some point in time politics stopped being about doing what’s best for the country and about power and status. Politicians feel more like celebrities than politicians to me. I would hope that if people were living back then, that they would vote based on their beliefs and not for a party, but sometimes I am too optimistic for my own good. I think people have the freedom to be stupid and not think for themselves now. People didn’t have that freedom back then. Stupidity and the inability to think critically and etch out a life for yourself and your family left you starving or dead. Modern life is too easy and for the majority of people in the US, the definition of hard work is a joke. There hasn’t been an election that I’ve voted in since I was 18 that felt like there was any difference between the candidates. I also get the feeling that if I were wiser and not idealistic when I first voted, I wouldn’t have seen a difference between the two candidates then either.
@mtngirlsouth - I was thinking about calling Alex Jones.
@Erika_Steele - Pretty much, and yes, people have a lot more freedom to be stupid today. That’s for sure. I agree with most of what you said here, but I would like to add one thing:
Back in the 1800′s you also had a lot of poor white people in the south who were hard working small farmers, and didn’t own slaves, but were illiterate at the same time. I imagine that a lot of them voted Democrat just because it was the southern thing to do, and since it was prior to the information age, information was not easily accessable, especially for people unable to read. So while they probably had good common sense, my guess is that they were probably fairly ignorant in a lot of areas.
@DougX831 - My guess is that he got hung up on the part where I said that the majority pro-abortion liberals would have also been pro-slavery, and as a result missed the rest of my points. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - Hangman will be easier to get through to. They are the ones who brought national attention to that man who got stranded in Hawaii when they suddenly decided he was on the no flight list.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - I hadn’t considered your second point in my response, but you are right. It just can’t be compared to the elective ignorance that occurs in the US today.
@Erika_Steele - Yep, today we have willful ignorance, which is inexcusible. You know, if our political system were functioning properly then we should have been able to replace the Republicans and Democrats by now. Political parties have been changed in the past, but these days we seem to be locked into what we have.
@davidian - Generalizations are very useful.
It’s like when lots of people think, say and do stupid things, you can generalize very accurately that those people are stupid.
And then, depending on your feelings about stupid people, you can think, say or do something intelligent in response to them.
This past election season was incredibly disappointing to me with how they pulled all of those shenanigans to change rules on Ron Paul to keep him off of ballots. I ended up voting for Gary Johnson myself. Romney sure as hell wasn’t getting my vote and neither was Obama. The neo-cons are really not much different than the Democrats. They both want big government, just for different things.
Republicans who go along with Democrats are called RINOs. They are not true Republicans, but they are doing everything possible to destroy the conservative center. Liberal Democrats have moved so far to the Left that the Center looks like it is extremist Right wing.
Realistically speaking, both parties are the same side of the same coin. One is the land and one is the groove. Neither side has any moral high ground to work with.
@firetyger - I considered voting for Gary Johnson, but I wanted Obama gone and figured that voting for GJ would be throwing my vote away. Ironically they threw my vote away anyways and sent me a letter boasting about it.
I don’t know what I am going to do on the next election. I may not still be in the US at that time. They will probably throw away my ballot again. Asshats. This government has nothing to do with me.
@wordwarrior39 - Aren’t most of them going along with the Democrats right now? I don’t see them stopping Obama from doing anything he wants to do.
The Democrats are extreme left of left. I really wish that they would all just pick up and go to a country that operates fully upon the type of policies and ideology they are trying to to bring to the US. I reccomend North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba.
“In either case the Democrats and much of their constituency violated the natural rights of a large segment of the population, based on subjective arguments on how they are less than human. “
pro-abortion =/= pro-choice. you could at least get your terms right.
also, the argument in favor of abortion has nothing to do with whether a fetus is human. it obviously is… it has human DNA. the issue is whether a human being physically attached to another human being, and completely unable to live independently, should have rights equal to the being it’s attached to. furthermore, rights due to American citizens are not conferred until after birth… meaning Constitutional rights apply to them as much as they apply to any non-American (not at all).
i also take issue with forcing women to go through pregnancy, when the requirements for a safe pregnancy are not enforced through law. as a woman who’d have an abortion in a heartbeat, i would continue to drink and smoke through a pregnancy i could not terminate. i’d also skip seeing a doctor. i can barely afford to see one just for my own problems, and my job does not offer maternity leave.
are you willing to pass legislation forcing me to behave as a pregnant woman? if not, will you care much about the financial burden that children with special needs will place on the adoption and foster care system?
it seems odd that you’re against the government telling people how to live their lives, and yet you want to legislate what i do with my uterus.
Democrats of the past were pro-slavery
Most Democrats (the Ruling Classhole politicians, anyway) have always been in favor of slavery in various forms, whether it was involuntary servitude in the military – “the draft” – or the income tax, or mandatory reporting requirements, or whatever. Just like their counterparts in the Republican Party. The only differences between them and some asswipe cracking a whip across someone’s back are of severity and their choices of issues to enslave us all about.
@flapper_femme_fatale - Are you really that cold?
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - Everyone said ignorance is no excuse in the Information Age. It is actually easier to be ignorant because anyone can find support for their argument using a search engine for fifteen minutes. Not only that, it is easier to spread lies as well as truth.
I am curious about your statement that there are few Christian conservatives (apparently atheist, agnostic, and other philosophical/religious conservatives don’t count) in the NE thus it is a Democrat state. If the NE is anything like most other states, the votes are never overwhelmingly one way or the other over a long-term trend. Most states are purple. I live in Kansas and until this past year (despite being considered a super-conservative red state) the state had moderate progressive politicians. In the presidential elections the state always goes Republican but the vote is usually split about 60/40.
@flapper_femme_fatale - Most pro-life people are pro-birth not pro-life. The care of the child after it is born is usually considered irrelevant. Luckily, I don’t have to suffer people like that in real life. Most of my Christian friends (despite being pro-life) are Democrat precisely because the Democratic party supports social programs that they believe are in line with their religious beliefs about helping the poor. They still give to private charity but are well aware of private charity’s limitations and prejudices that can occur.
@flapper_femme_fatale - I could respond to your highly subjective and emotion laden argument but there is no need as you have only served to prove the points I made in the journal entry.
@mikewb1971 - Well said sir. Yes they are trying to enslave us now with Obamacare. They want to tell us what medical treatments we can and cannot have, what age we can’t have them past, what to eat, what to own, what to say, what we can look at online, what videogames we can play, etc., etc. I want to tell them to take their regulations, mandatory vaccines, and smart meters, and shove it up their pipes where it deserves to go.
@wordwarrior39 - Like many on the left, she places no objective value on life. She is more concerned with her lifestyle choices and having other people take responsibility for the resulting problems.
@snarkius - Well, what I meant was that you can actually go online and watch videos of what the politicians are saying, vs. going by hearsay as many of them had to during the 1800′s. But yes, people can easily find garbage online.
I don’t think the NE is anything like the rest of the country any more than California is. You can see that they are a pretty solid Democrat voting bloc and have been for some time. Yes there are other kinds of conservatives besides Christian conservatives, but I was speaking on Christian conservatives because that is the group that liberals like to focus on, and they also blame us for slavery even though we were the impetus behind the abolition movement. That being said, I don’t believe that there are many conservatives of any sort up on the northeast states. Those states have high taxes and regulations, and they have stricter gun control laws and also laws regulating melee weapons as well. When Glen Beck was in one of those states he went to see a movie and some prick through his drink at Glen’s wife. Then they said that they don’t want conservatives there. If someone threw something at my wife they would probably have some hospital time. Furthermore, my best friend is from NYC, and he has told me some stories. He said they had a politican there, at one point, who was wanting to tax people based on how much rain falls on their property. Of all the stupid things.
So no, I don’t think they are very much like the rest of the country. It’s ironic since those states are really where the US culture, civlization, and legal system were formed, but they no longer embody those values. It’s sort of like how Indian civilization started in the Indus River Valley, but today that area is in Pakistan, which has nothing to do with Indian culture and values. The English did a good thing by putting Porkistan and Bangladesh as separate countries. I wish we could do the same with the northeast states and the west coast states.
@snarkius - I am certainly not pro-birth, at least, not for everyone. The fact is killing a child is not acceptable, regardless of how dismal the circumstances might be. That is the same kind of metnality that leads to euthanizing (spelling?) old people.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - so you wasted your time with a snarky comment? you must not have much of a life…
@snarkius - you are lucky. most pro-lifers i know are extremely anti-welfare and don’t feel much remorse for children suffering in poverty.
i think a lot of pro-lifers want to use pregnancy as a deterrent/punishment for casual sex. what they don’t realize is that married, committed couples get abortions as well. my mother had one while she was engaged to my father, a few years before i was born. i’ve always applauded her for it. i know too many women who went through with unplanned pregnancies and then spent the rest of their lives bitching about it.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - i’m also going to assume that you won’t answer because you can’t come up with one
@flapper_femme_fatale - Actually I was trying to save time, and I wasn’t being snarky I was being serious.
@flapper_femme_fatale - 5 years ago that would have worked on me.
@wordwarrior39 - funny, i often think the same of conservatives who don’t seem to care much about those unwanted children once they’re out of the womb.
EDIT: are you really that naive to think that forced motherhood will somehow cause me to suddenly care? why would i waste my time, effort, or money caring for a pregnancy i don’t want to begin with? one… i have zero maternal instinct. if it wasn’t so expensive or dangerous, i’d get my tubes tied. if i changed my mind? there are enough unwanted children in this world as it is… the responsible thing to do would be to adopt.
two, abortions have been happening since the beginning of civilization, and probably before. even if it were illegal, i’d seek out some home remedies. i know of several plants in my area that act to induce miscarriage. sure, it’d be dangerous. but considering how much a pregnancy would ruin my life, i’m willing to take the risk.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - how is abortion passing responsibility on to someone else?
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - you were being a douche.
@flapper_femme_fatale - Do I have any incentive for giving you a full response?
@flapper_femme_fatale - Then the smart thing for you and others seeking to avoid having motherhood forced upon them would be to avoid any and all sexual activity. Not only do you not have pregnancy forced upon you, but you also do not have throat cancer forced upon you, either. Abstinencewould save you a lot of health problems and a lot of money and a lot of stress. Too bad Liberals hate the idea of abstinence. Self-control is anathema to Liberals, but it would save everyone a lot of grief if more people practiced it.
@wordwarrior39 - Well said. There is also sterilzation which they could consider.
@wordwarrior39 -
“Abstinence would save you a lot of health problems and a lot of money and a lot of stress.”
http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/guide/10-surprising-health-benefits-of-sex
it would appear that the general scientific community disagrees with you in regards to health problems and stress. as for money, i don’t see how. i take birth control mostly to curb my PMDD, and i’d continue to take it even if i practiced abstinence. initially, i was put on birth control years before becoming sexually active, because it helped with my acne. it still does. i’d also probably continue to take birth control since i run the risk of getting raped and becoming pregnant from that.
i don’t spend money for sex in any other fashion. my SO is not into lingerie. we don’t have sex very often, so a box of condoms lasts a long time. actually, becoming abstinent would mean i’d have to invest in some decent vibrators… those can be expensive.
also, i’ll take your suggestion of abstinence seriously when conservatives apply it to their own destructive behavior: industrial activities that harm the environment, supporting gun rights at the expense of victims of mass shootings, etc. not to mention, theists who preach their faith at the expense of encouraging discrimination of non-believers and any minority group considered damned.
if you can practice your lifestyle at the expense of others, so can i.
@wordwarrior39 - also, i’m not sure why you think it’s an issue of self-control. most women who have an abortion were using birth control, indicating forethought. and sometimes abortions are performed for medical reasons, such as when a pregnancy’s complications endanger the mother’s life. and there’s the issue of women getting pregnant from rape… although, it seems that conservatives think that getting pregnant from rape means you were asking for it.
and i certainly do not hate the idea of abstinence. it’s just not for me. what i do hate, though, is when it’s taught in place of valuable information. i lost my virginity at age 16, and i would have done so with or without knowledge of birth control, STDs, proper condom use, etc. thankfully, my parents stepped in and taught me everything my school was not allowed to. our formal sexual education was abstinence-only, and more girls ended up pregnant by senior year than any year previously. obviously, abstinence alone doesn’t work.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - *shrug* your choice. but i still maintain that you’re a douche.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - i’d actually be fine with sterilization, if it was affordable and had fewer complications.
@flapper_femme_fatale - How is that different from your normal opinion of me?
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - my normal opinion of you is more along the lines of ignorant, homophobic, etc. being a douche has more to do with behavior than ideology. my grandmother is also ignorant and homophobic, but she’s still nice.
@flapper_femme_fatale - I still think you’re being subjective, but OK.
Interesting take, and I like the analogy to slavery being unjustified in and of itself. I think it’s absurd that abortions are done so often when there are so many alternatives. Birth control is nearly free to those who cannot pay, the morning after pill is available without a prescription for older teenagers and adults. If these preventive methods are used exactly as intended, and only stopped once emotionally and financially stable enough to face the repercussions of not using it, abortion rates will be extremely small. I think that those who get abortions done which are subsidized by taxpayer money (HAI THX Planned Parenthood!) should be offered free sterilization afterwards.
As a fetus cannot exist without violating a non-consenting mother’s rights, I do not see it as an autonomous human being until it is viable. In other words: I don’t think a woman should be forced to sacrifice her body for a parasite, (whether it’s human or otherwise), and whether she knowingly created it or not– in the same way that she has a right to stop having sex even if she initially consented to it. But I certainly place judgment on her for creating the unborn child in the first place, provided she was not in the <1% who just happened to be unlucky after using appropriate precautions.
@DrummingMediocrity - Thanks, I get tired of hearing how “the parties switched sides,” which is a claim that has no basis in reality, and yes, there are lots of alternatives to abortions. I think it would be a great help both to the economy and the gene pool if a lot of those people got sterilized. State funded abortions and contraception (like they want) are a no-go, but I would be 100% OK with state funded sterilzation. I might even donate to that fund.
I’m actually kind of a parasite on my parents right now. Or at least, I was for a couple of years, but now I pay them rent. As a matter of principle I am against abortion, except in cases where it is necessary to save the woman’s life, but we also have the technology for serrogate wombs. However, I am not one of the strong pro-life people who is determined to do something about it. The most I do is bring it up in discussions and blogs, and I don’t lose any sleep over the fact that they are going on. That being said, I don’t know how I would react if I had to face the type of circumstances where one might get an abortion. I once had to consider it hypothetically. Will send yuo a note.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - If you put salt in the horse’s oats, it will certainly drink.