Posted on 10/26/2004 10:47:53 AM PDT by OriginalChristian
Democrats: the party of the little guy. Republicans: the party of the wealthy. Those images of America's two major political wings have been frozen for generations. The stereotypes were always a little off, incomplete, exaggerated. (Can you say Adlai Stevenson?) But like most stereotypes, they reflected rough truths.
No more. Starting in the 1960s and '70s, whole blocs of "little guys"--ethnics, rural residents, evangelicals, cops, construction workers, homemakers, military veterans--began moving into the Republican column. And big chunks of America's rich elite--financiers, academics, heiresses, media barons, software millionaires, entertainers--drifted into the Democratic Party.
The extent to which the parties have flipped positions on the little-guy/rich-guy divide is illustrated by research from the Ipsos-Reid polling firm. Comparing counties that voted strongly for Bush to those that voted strongly for Gore in the 2000 election, the study shows that in pro-Bush counties only 7 percent of voters earned at least $100,000, while 38 percent had household incomes below $30,000. In the pro-Gore counties, fully 14 percent pulled in $100,000 or more, while 29 percent earned less than $30,000.
It is "becoming harder by the day to take the Democrats seriously as the party of the common man," writes columnist Daniel Henninger. "The party's primary sources of support have become trial lawyers and Wall Street financiers. It is becoming a party run by a new class of elites who make fast money--$25 million for 30 days work on a movie, millions (even billions) winning lawsuits against doctors...millions to do arithmetic for a business merger."
(Excerpt) Read more at taemag.com ...
Enjoy...
The democratic party today is Nobles and serfs.
I was just talking to a freind this morning about how I drive through local town with average house prices over $300k, and the majority of lawn signs are Kerry.
In a nearby area with a much more rural feel and average home prices around $150k, you see a predominance of Bush signs.
This was not a scientific survey. LOL
Just attend a few conventions: district, county, state, etc., and you'll see the lie of that.
True, the Dems no longer represent the little guy, but the Repubs are rapidly becoming the party of big government. We (conservatives) should learn from the Dems and fight to ensure our party isn't similarly destroyed from within.
(1) The super wealthy who are either (a) born into luxury or (b) get paid an enormous amount of money for ridiculously little effort (Hollywood, journalism, etc.)
(2) Wealth producers and protectors - from the local storeowner to the middle manager to the large-scale entrepreneur or executive, as well as law enforcement, firemen, security, etc.
(3) Wealth eaters - deadbeats, insurance scammers, parasites, plaintiff's lawyers, "community activists", bureaucrats, etc.
Of these categories (1) and (3) are most likely to form the Democrat base while (2) is the Republican base.
People often lump (2) and (3) together as "the little guy" but there is no natural affinity between the bodega owner and the bum begging change outside his shop. There is a closer moral and attitudinal affinity between the bodega owner and the CEO of a medium-sized corporation.
The (1)s want to take the (2)s wealth and give it to the (3)s so the (1)s can feel good about themselves.
Absolutely. The John Kerry's of the world feel guilty because they have enormous wealth while doing nothing to earn it, so they think they should help "the poor" to even out the injustice.
Yet they don't want to give up their lifestyle, so they feel that it's better to take away the money, earned or not, of less enlightened people than themselves in order to redress "injustice."
They only know their own experience, so they assume that all prosperous people's wealthy is fundamentally unearned.
Respectfully, I don't think that guilt is the operative dynamic in the "Rich Socialist" phenomenon. I think it is "un-fulfillment". Windsurfing and skiing at St Moritz do not nourish the soul. They are empty pleasures. The Wealthy Left, like the Kennedy's and the Rockefellers, use their "concern for the less fortunate and the environment" to add some meaning to their active, but emotionally empty, lives.
That's fine with me. Just don't ask me to pay for it.
Bingo!
Yeah, the Rat Party's structure is starting to resemble the new stadiums and arenas they're always gulling the public into building with the People's money -- lots of luxury boxes with balconettes and railings they can lean on while they're spilling beer on some tired-from-work dad and his kids down below.
Micturating, as usual, on the peasants from a great height. That's the life!
Oh, I want to be a lawyer! I want an MBA!
The little guy image of the Democrats goes back to Andrew Jackson. I don't think we can do much to change it. Exposure of truth is now greeted with disdain.
great read
The Democrat party = Plantation Politics. A party of wealthy patricians (and wanna bees) who use strong arm foremen to keep this hopeless order in power.
A revolt is coming...
And as a proud Draka, I would prefer death before being counted among the serfs! (Call me Snake)
IMO, any wealthy person who spouts off socialist "ideals" is an out-and-out hypocrite and liar. Their deeds reflect a lack of courage in their convictions.
If they were truly earnest in their ravings, they would divest themselves of any wealth they possess beyond what is necessary for survival, and give it to the poor.
Were they to do so, they would be worthy of respect for their honesty. However, by keeping their mansions and private jets, they show themselves as lying, pandering hypocrites - at best.
Their mansions and jets only make it all the more easier to live with their lies and hypocrisy. They care, but then again, they don't care. They are like Super Bourgeoisie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.