Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Frederick Douglass  (Read 4033 times)

UNAS

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2007, 10:43:36 AM »
Southern Democrats= typically equal Republicans

I least they did once upon a time. Some of them might not have gotten the memo they were suppose to switch

PNym

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 781
    • View Profile
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #11 on: September 04, 2007, 12:17:51 PM »
Southern Democrats= typically equal Republicans

I least they did once upon a time. Some of them might not have gotten the memo they were suppose to switch

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are southern Democrats. I'm pretty sure they aren't Republicans.

UNAS

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #12 on: September 04, 2007, 12:42:07 PM »
Southern Democrats= typically equal Republicans

I least they did once upon a time. Some of them might not have gotten the memo they were suppose to switch

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are southern Democrats. I'm pretty sure they aren't Republicans.

UNAS

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #13 on: September 04, 2007, 12:44:11 PM »
Southern Democrats= typically equal Republicans

I least they did once upon a time. Some of them might not have gotten the memo they were suppose to switch

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are southern Democrats. I'm pretty sure they aren't Republicans.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or genuine, but in any case i was refering to Boll Weevils (e.g. Zel Miller) and to a lesser extent Blue Dogs Dems. Obviously not Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter LOL

PNym

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 781
    • View Profile
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #14 on: September 04, 2007, 01:04:10 PM »
Southern Democrats= typically equal Republicans

I least they did once upon a time. Some of them might not have gotten the memo they were suppose to switch

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are southern Democrats. I'm pretty sure they aren't Republicans.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or genuine, but in any case i was refering to Boll Weevils (e.g. Zel Miller) and to a lesser extent Blue Dogs Dems. Obviously not Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter LOL

If I'm not mistaken, the "Blue Dog" type of Democrat shares similar positions with Republicans on social issues, not the role of government.

The traditional conservative distrust of expansion of government power precludes holders of this belief from proposing too many programs (think Reagan's quote, "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help).

If "Blue Dogs" do not hold a similar position, and hold the Democratic position favoring the expansion of government programs, then if these programs necessarily create much waste, the Democratic position can be fairly blamed for this outcome.

That's not to say that all Republicans are in favor of limited government, of course. But the traditional position has been.

UNAS

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #15 on: September 04, 2007, 01:32:48 PM »
Southern Democrats= typically equal Republicans

I least they did once upon a time. Some of them might not have gotten the memo they were suppose to switch

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are southern Democrats. I'm pretty sure they aren't Republicans.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or genuine, but in any case i was refering to Boll Weevils (e.g. Zel Miller) and to a lesser extent Blue Dogs Dems. Obviously not Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter LOL

If I'm not mistaken, the "Blue Dog" type of Democrat shares similar positions with Republicans on social issues, not the role of government. [/quote]

I beleive I said to "a lesser extent"

[/quote]The traditional conservative distrust of expansion of government power precludes holders of this belief from proposing too many programs (think Reagan's quote, "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help). [/quote]

I am not sure what this has to do with anything

[/quote]If "Blue Dogs" do not hold a similar position, and hold the Democratic position favoring the expansion of government programs, then if these programs necessarily create much waste, the Democratic position can be fairly blamed for this outcome.[/quote]

what outcome

That's not to say that all Republicans are in favor of limited government, of course. But the traditional position has been.
[/quote]

PNym

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 781
    • View Profile
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2007, 10:06:31 PM »
If I'm not mistaken, the "Blue Dog" type of Democrat shares similar positions with Republicans on social issues, not the role of government.

I beleive I said to "a lesser extent"

The traditional conservative distrust of expansion of government power precludes holders of this belief from proposing too many programs (think Reagan's quote, "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help).

I am not sure what this has to do with anything

If "Blue Dogs" do not hold a similar position, and hold the Democratic position favoring the expansion of government programs, then if these programs necessarily create much waste, the Democratic position can be fairly blamed for this outcome.

what outcome
That's not to say that all Republicans are in favor of limited government, of course. But the traditional position has been.

This tangent arose when you attempted to assign responsibility for the wasteful spending and poor administration conducted by the Louisiana government to the Republican Party.

I pointed out that Louisiana's state government is dominated by Democrats. You countered by saying that the Louisiana Democrats are, in fact, "Blue Dog" Democrats, and I assume that assertion implies that these "Blue Dogs" are conservative, and therefore conservatives are responsible for the waste. I countered your counter by saying that the "Blue Dogs" do not share the traditional conservative position against government programs, but rather the Democratic position that promotes government spending, and since government spending necessarily results in waste, the blame for the waste falls on true-blue Democrats, not conservatives.

UNAS

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #17 on: September 05, 2007, 10:39:36 AM »
If I'm not mistaken, the "Blue Dog" type of Democrat shares similar positions with Republicans on social issues, not the role of government.

I beleive I said to "a lesser extent"

The traditional conservative distrust of expansion of government power precludes holders of this belief from proposing too many programs (think Reagan's quote, "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help).

I am not sure what this has to do with anything

If "Blue Dogs" do not hold a similar position, and hold the Democratic position favoring the expansion of government programs, then if these programs necessarily create much waste, the Democratic position can be fairly blamed for this outcome.

what outcome
That's not to say that all Republicans are in favor of limited government, of course. But the traditional position has been.

This tangent arose when you attempted to assign responsibility for the wasteful spending and poor administration conducted by the Louisiana government to the Republican Party.

I pointed out that Louisiana's state government is dominated by Democrats. You countered by saying that the Louisiana Democrats are, in fact, "Blue Dog" Democrats, and I assume that assertion implies that these "Blue Dogs" are conservative, and therefore conservatives are responsible for the waste. I countered your counter by saying that the "Blue Dogs" do not share the traditional conservative position against government programs, but rather the Democratic position that promotes government spending, and since government spending necessarily results in waste, the blame for the waste falls on true-blue Democrats, not conservatives.

You do realize that under the current administration(which for 6 years had a monopoly on the senate,house and executive branch) more dollars have been spent than any other administration combined in US history. Under this administration, which if I am not mistaken is under republican/conservative/neocon leadership more government has been installed then in all modern democratic presidential administrations. Lastly, under this administration more invasions of privacy, attacks on personal freedom and attacks on government transparancy have transpired. Face it my friend, conservatives will always live in the shadows of Barry Goldwater. Who by the way is turning over in his grave hourly by the very forces that oppose his notion of conservative ideal instituted by the bush admistration. Before you start regaling me with the minutia of skewed facts i just find it amusing how conservatives have always lamented the democratic big government and gross budget expenditures, but look who is doing all the spending and creating department after department and office after office. Please concede and save face.

PNym

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 781
    • View Profile
Re: Frederick Douglass
« Reply #18 on: September 07, 2007, 10:50:51 AM »
If I'm not mistaken, the "Blue Dog" type of Democrat shares similar positions with Republicans on social issues, not the role of government.

I beleive I said to "a lesser extent"

The traditional conservative distrust of expansion of government power precludes holders of this belief from proposing too many programs (think Reagan's quote, "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help).

I am not sure what this has to do with anything

If "Blue Dogs" do not hold a similar position, and hold the Democratic position favoring the expansion of government programs, then if these programs necessarily create much waste, the Democratic position can be fairly blamed for this outcome.

what outcome
That's not to say that all Republicans are in favor of limited government, of course. But the traditional position has been.

This tangent arose when you attempted to assign responsibility for the wasteful spending and poor administration conducted by the Louisiana government to the Republican Party.

I pointed out that Louisiana's state government is dominated by Democrats. You countered by saying that the Louisiana Democrats are, in fact, "Blue Dog" Democrats, and I assume that assertion implies that these "Blue Dogs" are conservative, and therefore conservatives are responsible for the waste. I countered your counter by saying that the "Blue Dogs" do not share the traditional conservative position against government programs, but rather the Democratic position that promotes government spending, and since government spending necessarily results in waste, the blame for the waste falls on true-blue Democrats, not conservatives.

You do realize that under the current administration(which for 6 years had a monopoly on the senate,house and executive branch) more dollars have been spent than any other administration combined in US history. Under this administration, which if I am not mistaken is under republican/conservative/neocon leadership more government has been installed then in all modern democratic presidential administrations. Lastly, under this administration more invasions of privacy, attacks on personal freedom and attacks on government transparancy have transpired. Face it my friend, conservatives will always live in the shadows of Barry Goldwater. Who by the way is turning over in his grave hourly by the very forces that oppose his notion of conservative ideal instituted by the bush admistration. Before you start regaling me with the minutia of skewed facts i just find it amusing how conservatives have always lamented the democratic big government and gross budget expenditures, but look who is doing all the spending and creating department after department and office after office. Please concede and save face.

Well, I agree with you - for whatever reason, this administration can't hold Congress fiscally accountable, and could definitely propose better processes to handle the civil liberties issues that arise when it prosecutes the war on terrorism/Islamofacism. Furthermore, even when the administration's proposals seem sound, its propensity to perpetually stick its foot in its mouth makes it frustrating for those of us who do find some good in its ideas.

And it may amuse you to know that many conservatives and libertarians also are alarmed by these developments.

But I have no doubt that a president Gore or Kerry would do an even worse job :(

Besides, I thought we were talking about the relative wastefulness of Democratic and Republican administrations (not just presidential administrations, but all governmental organizations) in general, and not the Bush administration in particular.

What is it that you want me to concede?