Being a democrat is the exact same thing. Blind support of a political party is a sure fire way to lock your self into a very narrow set of beliefs. Thats why i always try to distinguish between democrats and liberals, or conservatives or republicans. If a person is a democrat or republican, it is incredibly easy to figure out exactly what their beliefs are. The same can not be said about conservatives or liberals who do not "pledge allegiance" to a party. The fact is that over the years there has been almost no difference between what republican politicians have done and what democrat politicans have done, but if you were to have a liberal arguing with a conservative where neither was affiliated with a party there would be a huge difference. Probably the only chance the country has of fixing itself would be to ban political affiliation altogether, as both parties seem dead set on fucking us over regardless. Congress is basically like a bunch of 13 year old highschool students where everyone just does what the popular person is doing, and no one is capable of thinking for themselves. It is the worst kind of group think.
+1 Exactly. Repubs wonder why Obama can't ride roughshod over the Democrats in Congress the way Bush, Bush and Reagan rode over the Congressional Repubs. Totally different worldviews.
I think George Washington said it best in regards to the dangers of political parties: "They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests." Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_George_Washington_feel_about_political_parties#ixzz1eeShviSE
Remember, this is the "news" organization that went to court and fought for the right to lie to the public...and won: Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie. By Mike Gaddy. Published Feb. 28, 2003 On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast. On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy cows. The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers. Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news. The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves. In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation. Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by the verdict. http://ceasespin.org/ceasespin_blog...s/fox_news_gets_okay_to_misinform_public.html
DAS trader, exactly, to illustrate how corrupt and unconstitutional our system is you may recall the 08 elections. Mccain and Obama were at the debates and Nader had the nerve to show up to debate as well and in a bipartisan agreement lasting as long as a kardashian marriage both agreed to keep Nader off of tv during the debates. Only the Tea Party will be able to restore our nations constitution and not the perversions that harm our nation today. There should be a hundred candidates up there debating their ideas which way our nation should go not simply two members from two failed party. America is a strong nation but we can only survive incompetent political leadership for so long. Reject Incumbent Politicians is the order of the day (R.I.P) not ONE member of either party deserves to hold elected office.