Rick Santorum: It Would Be 'Suicidal' For GOP To Embrace Gay Marriage
56 replies, posted
[QUOTE=sgman91;40215892]"The democratic party believes in equal rights to all and special privilege to none. The republican party holds that special privileges are essential to national prosperity. It believes that national prosperity must originate with the special interests and seep down through the channels of trade to the less favored industries to the wage earners and small salaried employes. It has accordingly enthroned privilege and nurtured selfishness.
The republican party is concerned chiefly with material things; the democratic party is concerned chiefly with human rights. The masses, burdened by discriminating laws and unjust administration, are demanding relief. The favored special interests, represented by the republican party, contented with their unjust privileges, are demanding that no change be made. The democratic party stands for remedial legislation and progress. The republican party stands still." - Democratic Principles of the Democratic party platform in 1924 ([url]http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29593[/url])
People always say they switched, but it sure doesn't seem like it when you actually read what each party supported. You could take this exact quote, put it in the modern democratic platform, and no one would be able to tell the difference.[/QUOTE]
You do realize the republican party was formed as an anti-slavery movement right? I'd say they were pretty "concerned with human rights" back then.
[QUOTE=sgman91;40215892]"The democratic party believes in equal rights to all and special privilege to none. The republican party holds that special privileges are essential to national prosperity. It believes that national prosperity must originate with the special interests and seep down through the channels of trade to the less favored industries to the wage earners and small salaried employes. It has accordingly enthroned privilege and nurtured selfishness.
The republican party is concerned chiefly with material things; the democratic party is concerned chiefly with human rights. The masses, burdened by discriminating laws and unjust administration, are demanding relief. The favored special interests, represented by the republican party, contented with their unjust privileges, are demanding that no change be made. The democratic party stands for remedial legislation and progress. The republican party stands still." - Democratic Principles of the Democratic party platform in 1924 ([url]http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29593[/url])
People always say they switched, but it sure doesn't seem like it when you actually read what each party supported. You could take this exact quote, put it in the modern democratic platform, and no one would be able to tell the difference.[/QUOTE]
many democrats also opposed the civil rights movement(they were called dixie democrats, sorta like the tea party for racist democrats).
they didn't switch, it's just that parties evolve over time as people come and go, as issues change, and as corporate sponsors change spending priorities.
Keep in mind I am talking about the Democratic Party in the South. During and after Reconstruction they seemed more concerned with reversing the changes of Reconstruction and going back to the "good ole days" of the pre-Civil War South. The Democratic Party in the South definitely did not want equal rights for freed slaves and poor whites. They spent most of the time disenfranchising people these people.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South[/url]
In the South (particularly in Louisiana), the Democratic party was the overwhelming conservative and more powerful party until the 60s when the differences between national and southern democrats became irreconcilable.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;40215951]You do realize the republican party was formed as an anti-slavery movement right? I'd say they were pretty "concerned with human rights" back then.[/QUOTE]
I must not have been clear. It seemed Aden was saying the democrats now hold the positions than the republicans used to hold and vice versa (that they switched places). I'm saying that the democrats of that time period used the same rhetoric that current democrats use today and republicans today are very similar to republicans of the 1920s.
[QUOTE=sgman91;40215992]I must not have been clear. It seemed Aden was saying the democrats now hold the positions than the republicans used to hold and vice versa (that they switched places). I'm saying that the democrats of that time period used the same rhetoric that current democrats use today and republicans today are very similar to republicans of the 1920s.[/QUOTE]
Ah, what I took Aden as meaning was that before the 1920s the Republican and Democratic parties held roughly opposite views than what they do today. Which to me at sounds about right considering the roles the parties played in the 19th century.
[QUOTE=sgman91;40215992]I must not have been clear. It seemed Aden was saying the democrats now hold the positions than the republicans used to hold and vice versa (that they switched places). I'm saying that the democrats of that time period used the same rhetoric that current democrats use today and republicans today are very similar to republicans of the 1920s.[/QUOTE]
The 1920s is supposedly when they started switching, so you'd have to further back.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;40216105]The 1920s is supposedly when they started switching, so you'd have to further back.[/QUOTE]
saying they "switched" is still sorta silly. it's like when people say that classic liberals and conservatives "switched". it isn't really applicable because these ideologies evolved in certain circumstances and certain issues held different importance.
it's simplistic to say the democrats and republicans switched.
Funny, considering "suicidal" was a fitting adjective for his presidential campaign.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;40216105]The 1920s is supposedly when they started switching, so you'd have to further back.[/QUOTE]
you mean the 70s
I just..
really.. [i]Really[/i]
Want to shoot this fucker in the face.
And I know what you're thinking: "Hurf durf angsty violent teenager heurf deurf"
But for the love of Christ, every word that pours out of this shitballs mouth is just.. like westboro and the neonazi's fucked and spewed out literary atrophy.
Just looking at his ugly mugshot, lets you know he's a douche.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;40215163]Yeah, getting all of those votes for finally supporting gay marriage will surely be the death of the party.[/QUOTE]
There goes all their bigot voters. Lets not forget the party gets most of its votes from republicans who still oppose it.
I'm particularly aroused at the thought of the democratic party and the republican party dying out in the next few elections, because they're both so retardedly far off in their own direction, that you're fucked with either party.
I mean, I have more republican ideals than democratic, but I refuse to be called a republican for.. obvious reasons. But you won't [i]ever[/i] win an election as an independent. not anymore.
[QUOTE=Persecution;40218012]I'm particularly aroused at the thought of the democratic party and the republican party dying out in the next few elections, because they're both so retardedly far off in their own direction, that you're fucked with either party.
I mean, I have more republican ideals than democratic, but I refuse to be called a republican for.. obvious reasons. But you won't [i]ever[/i] win an election as an independent. not anymore.[/QUOTE]
yeah i got a boner at the very thought of political parties crumbling too bro
No one is asking you to embrace gay marriage, not being backward cunts about the matter would already be a good step forward.
Rick Santorum overvalues the old redneck vote.
[QUOTE=Creid;40215255]Might be nitpicking but
[I]suicidal?[/I]
Think before you throw that word around.[/QUOTE]
I think he meant Political Suicide
[QUOTE=Persecution;40218012]I'm particularly aroused at the thought of the democratic party and the republican party dying out in the next few elections, because they're both so retardedly far off in their own direction, that you're fucked with either party.
I mean, I have more republican ideals than democratic, but I refuse to be called a republican for.. obvious reasons. But you won't [i]ever[/i] win an election as an independent. not anymore.[/QUOTE]
And be replaced with what?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40218336]And be replaced with what?[/QUOTE]
[thumb]http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/vermin-supreme-2.jpg[/thumb]
Wizard party and 'Don't be a dick' Party
And then, Santorum shouted to any passerby who would give him the time of day,
"PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME, LET ME BE RELEVANT PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEEE"
[QUOTE=iTrolol;40218711]And then, Santorum shouted to any passerby who would give him the time of day,
"PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME, LET ME BE RELEVANT PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEEE"[/QUOTE]Santorum is just butthurt because nobody has paid attention to him since he dropped out of the election. Apparently he feels the need to remind the world he exists....not that there is any rhyme or reason for it.
The dude, while running for president, very nearly called Obama a nigger and pretty much said black people dont deserve more money, of course he'd say this shit.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;40226350]The dude, while running for president, very nearly called Obama a nigger and pretty much said black people dont deserve more money, of course he'd say this shit.[/QUOTE]
no no he said [I]negotiator[/I]
Santorum is insightful and relevant.
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;40226403]no no he said [I]negotiator[/I][/QUOTE]
relevent
[video=youtube;XKxN1j3mgRc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKxN1j3mgRc[/video]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.