I think your seeing this through a narrow funnel, for many years the democratic south refused minorities equal rights. You couldn't find a sane minority who would vote democrat. However, the Republicans (Lincoln's party) turned their backs on them so they joined the enemies camp. Kind of like the Hispanic's did this last election.
So it isn't fair to say never, ever, it seems minorities are not loyal to parties and really vote for who represents their interest.
Democrats Get what They Deserve
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by OldRegular, Jun 30, 2009.
Page 3 of 4
-
-
Alabama, in the black belt, has had three legislators removed...all for financial reasons. (theft, embezzlement, etc...guilty as all-get-out).
The first election was just held. A republican didn't even run.
You're gonna tell me they're not loyal to a party?
That's crazy talk. The democrats can completely ignore the black vote. They'll get 90% of it, whether they do anything to earn it or not. There hasn't been a "jump" from one party to another in my lifetime. Not even close.
-
I said the democratic south wouldn't give blacks equal rights.
Also, your last statement is kind of biased. There are not enough minorities to put any candidate into office so there must be a lot more than minorities on that bandwagon. What you look at the bandwagon, do you see only minorities? Any reason for that OR? -
-
Secondly, could it be, that DC has monumentally stupid voters...that would vote for a crooked, drug-addicted felon before putting an honorable man in office?
Hey, the "polarized funnels" I'm looking through is the truth. DC voters insist on putting democrats in office. Are you going to tell me that a district that gives less than 10% to Republicans is anything but blindly partisan?
The point is...R's no longer run in Black districts. There's no point.
-
You sure we are not a democracy??? We appear to fit the definition. -
Evidently, someone has never heard that we live in a Republic. A purely democratic system is doomed to failure. We need the rule of law to protect ourselves from ourselves. Evidently though it isn't working when someone like Berry, a felon, is allowed to serve. This only perpetuates the idea that some are espousing that some folks are just too obviously stupid to be allowed to vote.
-
I think someone is trying to split a hair that is so thin it can't be split. -
-
Al Franken has done one thing for which he deserves credit. He is the only politician that I have agreed with OR's position. Actually, that is not exactly true. We disagree over the last administration and the Republican Party.
OR is right on when it comes to the Democrats and Franken. -
I was watching CSPAN with Senator Reid introducing Senator Franken. Does he remind anyone of former Senator Paul Simon?
-
And saying Democrats got what they deserve is to say the GOP got with they serve with Sanford, Ensign and the stall flirter. -
When SC voted in Sanford there was no idea that he was a philanderer. Not did the voters know that Ensign liked to grope under toilet stalls. These voters were obviously tricked. And, had they known I seriously doubt that either would have been put in office. But, it was and is quite clear the type of character that Franken has. And, yes the people on MN had the right to put him in and did. What makes me sad is the fact that the voters of a state, people I share a country with, are so morally inept that they would even consider voting for someone like Al.
-
-
A government of the masses.
Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.
Results in mobocracy.
Attitude toward property is comunistic-negating property rights.
Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate. whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.
Results in demagogism license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.
Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success.
A certain Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship."
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.
Republic:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.
Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.
Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.
A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.
Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.
Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world.
A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of:
Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.
- an executive and
- a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create
- a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize
- certain inherent individual rights.
Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic."
A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.
SOURCE
That good enough for ya? -
Thanks RBell for giving LeBuick the civics lesson. But, I think he knows good and well what a republic is. It just doesn't happen to fit into his belief of the way things should be. Otherwise he would not be such an adamant defender of the democrats and President Obama.
-
-
Thank you. I stand corrected.
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Yet another failed comparison by a libbie
Page 3 of 4