Well, y'all screw that up on an hourly basis. You might as well be a single party.
How come there are no Democrats on Mt. Rushmore?
- Thread starter HawktimusPrime
- Start date
Rs were never even married to him. Look it up. R lineage does not trace back that far. And of course the party can claim him, the same way Rs still claim Lincoln and Roosevelt and Eisenhower even though they all would fit better in the modern D party today. Please become the free soil party of Lincoln again. I dare you. Kiting is correct however, Jefferson would be more aligned with Ron Paul than Bush or Cruz or Trump.
No they don't. They're abandoning that moniker because one was a slave holder and the other was an indian killer.
my point has been made.......and you and your re-writers of American history have made asses of yourselves, yet again.
Huh? Are you sure you read my post? Or did you not check your stupid at the door?
Your point is retarded. The democrats who tried to claim Jefferson as one of them are also retarded.
Clinton signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act which precipitated the the banking collapse, backed the don't ask don't tell policy, signed the Defense of Marriage Act, was impeached, disbarred, the world trade center, the Cole, embassays in Africa bombed and had the chance to kill OBL before 911 and deferred due to collateral damage. He deserves his own special place, but it's not on a mountain, its much lower than that.
Richard M Nixon deserves a spot however. He got us out of Vietnam, opened trade with China, signed the Clean Air Act, created the EPA and the Occupational Health and Safety Act ( OSHA ) and if he had his own private Email account ( like Hil-Liar-y ) its hard to say what he might have accomplished had he finished his second term. He had ten times the morals of the Bastard from Hope, Arkansas.
Richard M Nixon deserves a spot however. He got us out of Vietnam, opened trade with China, signed the Clean Air Act, created the EPA and the Occupational Health and Safety Act ( OSHA ) and if he had his own private Email account ( like Hil-Liar-y ) its hard to say what he might have accomplished had he finished his second term. He had ten times the morals of the Bastard from Hope, Arkansas.
AS the political party's basic positions have morphed...The early Dems were all about state's rights (Jefferson/Jackson) and the GOP (Lincoln/Civil War) was all about expanding the power and influence of the national government.
AS the political party's basic positions have morphed...The early Dems were all about state's rights (Jefferson/Jackson) and the GOP (Lincoln/Civil War) was all about expanding the power and influence of the national government.
No, it isn't. Your lack of understanding American political history is amazing, though. But go ahead Tradition...re-write it how you see fit. Be happy.
Please don't use this word. It's digusting people still use this freely. Do you use the N word too?
Just because Ds aren't proud of our roots, doesn't mean those aren't the roots. Rs have noble roots. You don't need to steal ours.
I believe the new word is "intellectually challenged"! Although, I believe when used in context (medically) "retarded" is not the least bit offensive.
If Trump leaves the party to start a third party and gets elected president, would history say that Lincoln founded Trump's party?
Because that's what you're effectively trying to argue.
Isn't that fun? A point I like to point out every time Rs bring up their roots. They started as the pro labor party who believed a man should be able to feed himself with the sweat of his brow. That's a far cry from Trads current position that the government should have no say in employment conditions and contracts.
Like politicians..and people, don't all have warts?
My mother loved Andrew Jackson as a historical figure....and I always thought he was a real SOB. But they guy had no use for the Federal Bank and his reason(s), although simple, are pretty much "spot on."
Hold up here. Isn't this exactly what you are arguing to an even greater degree? You claim it went Jefferson, then split into Jackson Democrats and Whigs. Then Rs sprung up and poached some anti-slavery folks from each group. And from that you want to claim a slave holder as your founder. You may be intellectually challenged.
Well Trad.......the GOP of today is a mere shadow of what it was founded upon. So, keep searching...and you will soon discover "the light".....The GOP modern conservative party of Reagan is a liberal wing of the GOP of today. Hell, to me, the best Republican POTUS in my lifetime has been Bill Clinton. LBJ was perhaps the last Democrat to hold the office of POTUS.
No, no.... you completely misunderstand my point. I'm saying that Jefferson was not a Democrat AND he was not a Republican. Neither party even existed during Jefferson's political career.
Therefore, it is correct to say that there are no Democrats on Mount Rushmore.
So there are a lot of stupid people like you. Or maybe you just go many times a day. It has to be a shrine for stupidity.
Clinton was a very effective POTUS. The most effective one since LBJ. You or I don't have to like it but Bill Clinton could (and did) POTUS this nation for 8 years.
You aren't naming anything specific. You're just running off at the mouth. What made him effective? What did he accomplish?
Maybe they should put Newt Gingrich up there, after all his " Contract with America " is what paved the way for a balanced budget in Clinton's last two years in office and the run up in the stock market, which led to larger government revenues.
NAFTA, balanced budget, tax reform, guided the strongest period of economic growth in modern American history....created 22 million jobs, highest home ownership in American history, lowest unemployment % in America post-depression history, lowest crime rate in 23 years previous, 100k more cops on the street, Family Medical Leave Act, lowest poverty rate in the past 20 years, lowest teen birth rate in 60 years, deactivates 1700 nuclear warheads from the old Soviet Union, paid $369B off the national debt, lowest GFederal Income Tax burden in the past 35 previous years, plus a few more things......
What about the balanced budget of the previous 3 - 4 years BEFORE Newt's "Contract" james?
Balanced budget and tax reform were done by Congress. Are you saying that he should get credit for not vetoing them? Most of his presidency was during a tech bubble, which he had nothing to do with, and ended a couple years before he left office. All he really did was get us involved in a couple of wars, which I'm guessing is the reason why you want Obama up there too.
and not one US troop was killed by hostile fire..and the rest of your rant just reveals who you are and how you refuse to smell the coffee. The "budget" was balanced by both Newt and Bill.......and it was Bill's "pay/go" that made it possible. I don't know how old you were back in the 90's but I was a full grown contributor at the time and let me say this...the 90's under Bill were GOOD times........I made a lot of money for my retirement when Bill was POTUS. Jobs were plentiful, pay raised substantial and frequent and folks were buying homes and cars...........Those days of Clinton were good times....Plus there was some of the best comedy on TV every night...The network news frequently led off with the GOP accusations of another scandal of Clinton and highlighted the news with a special prosecutor making an arse of himself as he chased his own tail, more oft than not. Those were good days Nole.
In my 66 years, the Clinton years were far and away the most productive and rewarding (financially) years of my life. Democratic presidents mean "good times" as far as I am concerned.
Clinton benefited from the internet revolution. The "good times" had nothing to do with his leadership.
Bullshit! Clinton used the good times to balance the budget and pay down the nation's deficet. He developed policies to enhance these good times to much of the American public. You guys got your collective heads up your collective arses in denying this man his success as POTUS. He was in charge! He gets the credit.
As has been repeatedly explained to you, the president doesn't control the budget. He developed policies by sticking his finger in the air and figuring out which way the political winds were blowing. The man had no principles, no values, and no class.
The POTUS presents Congress with a budget. Congress works with his budget in mind. Your right, budgets are passed by the :Legislature. Also true is that the executive can veto this work if he finds it against his (the nation's ) best interests. Bill and Newt understood they needed to work together. Each got a lot of what they wanted as POTUS and Speaker. However, it is the POTUS that stirs the drink in Washington...it always has been and always will be that way.
