Posted on 09/20/2007 9:47:55 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
WHY DEMOCRATS JUST ABSOLUTELY HATE BEING CALLED .....
I've always being one who likes to get under the skin of the collective left, and glorioski, have I found a way to rattle Democrats. You just refer to their wonderful party as the Democrat Party! Lordy, does this put a burr in their thongs.
Well .. now I think I've found out why! A buddy of mine at CNN (who, for obvious reasons, shall remain unnamed) provided me with some interesting information. Joseph J. Ellis wrote a book called "Founding Brothers, The Revolutionary Generation." I ordered my copy this morning. One of the Amazon.com reviews for this book says "This book is really unique in that it gives a really interesting perspective not only on the men [our founding fathers] , but the dynamic between them." Now in that book by this renowned historian you will find some tasty information on the origination of the word "democrat." Many times I've told you that our founding fathers were none too fond of the idea of democracy, or, as they viewed it, mob rule. Here's the quote:
"... the term "democrat" originated as an epithet and referred to 'one who panders to the crude and mindless whims of the masses.'" Don't you love it? Could anything better define today's Democrat Party? Get with the program folks. It's the Democrat, not the "Democratic" Party.
http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html
I try to be accurate in all things and refer to them as the “fullocrap” party.
The correct term for a gathered groups is Demagogues.
“a person, esp. an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people.” (Random House Unabridged Dictionary)
The Democratic Party has been a moribund and decaying corpse for decades now. The rank and file are following the party at a distance of some years and what with masses of young and uneducated kids, low-life wastrels who cannot think for themselves and the perennially supply of social debris which will follow anyone who throws freebies at them, the party continues to recruit but only ‘resembles’ a living thing. But it is really a putrefying corpse...it represents NOTHING wholesome in our society and has NOT for many years.
More and more it represents the deviant ‘know-nothing’/’want everything for free’ fringe. Their disaffected and loser mentality is elevated to some kind of twisted equivalence with the clean living and hard working America which is being taxed into oblivion for the sake of preserving some kind of impracticable, degenerate, unproductive and naive Liberal ideal .
FWIW, the French Revolution killed anybody who was (or was thought might be) an “enemy of the people.” The great majority who were murdered were not aristocrats or priests. Quite a few were those who picked the wrong side in a faction fight, leading to the claim that “The Revolution eats its own children.”
In the Vendee, it is estimated up to 250,000 people were murdered, with the methods used foreshadowing the Gulag and the Holocaust.
I've seen a few Lefties try to turn it around and call the Republican Party the 'Republic' Party. No negative connotations in that - it just makes the Lefties look like desperate thinskinned dimwits.
“... the French Revolution killed anybody who was (or was thought might be) an “enemy of the people.”
The expression ‘...the People’ with a capital “P” scares me whenever I see it. Any one or any group looking out for the ‘People’ is VERY suspect to me. Those movements and those ideas are always a scam to force some fraud on the public.
Wish my library were free...it is over $100 per year and a line item on my tax bill.
How do they refer to themselves? I think they use the word “Democrat”, too. I guess it’s just not OK for Republicans to use it.
Oh my, I’ve never heard of a library charging to use it. Is it private?
Disagree (slightly). Your implication is that all those who have worked “for the People” have been scammers and therefore not sincere.
In reality, a great many of those fighting for “the People” have been sincere idealists. This only makes them more dangerous. As Orwell said, the most dangerous person in the world is an idealist with a machine gun.
A tyrant who is just an egomaniac, like Napoleon, is somewhat self-limiting in his tyranny. A tyrant like Pol Pot can go on killing long after it becomes counter-productive, confident he is serving the cause of The People.
While Hitler, Stalin and Mao seem to have believed in nothing but themselve, most of their followers probably sincerely believed in the rightness of their cause.
As I understand it, the incumbent party is blue, the challenger is red. For 12 years Republican was blue because we were the incumbent.
Someone stated that the color of the incumbent party alternates.
So much for my conspiracy theory that the MSM chose to color the conservatives red because coloring the democrats that color would be to mindful of the communist association.
In my reading, Napoleon was very disgusted with the ‘revolution’ and was more like a fascist than anything else. His esteem for the ‘People/people’ was low and he took a lot of guff from his immediate followers over it. Most of the guys who propped him up became disenchanted once he grabbed more and more power. On the way to Napoleon’s very lavish coronation I believe it was Marshal Ney who said ... ‘two million people died to put an end to this kind of s&^%’ He meant it too, as did most of the other very ‘democratic’ Marshals of the empire
No, County. How do you think yours is paid for?
The $ are usually just in the general fund and you don’t see them.
I have never had a card in the 17 years I have lived in FL and only went there for tax forms once. They no longer have them!
I may have to think about it. I just bought Laura’s new book...they just keep going up in price. I enjoy reading a bit at a time and going back when I hear an interview.
I read so much a book club is the only way to afford it! I take their ten books for about $10 and then buy four and cancel. Soon another offer comes in the mail and I join another club or take an offer to come back. They end up costing about like paperbacks and they are the most current novels.
Good post. Here’s my take:
The American and French Revolutions are very definitive, in my opinion. Two very different types of revolutions. The French Revolution was the first of many socialist revolutions throughout Europe, culminating in the Bolshevist Revolution. Thus, the French Revolution is the origin of Communism...when traced to its roots.
Since the world today is no longer composed of Monarchies, most governments, sad to say, have followed the lead of Rousseau and Robespierre, rather than Washington and Jefferson.
Moreover, governments that follow the French, not the American, template, deserve the epithet “Democratic.” True, many governments use the word Republic in their founding documents (as in France), but they are in truth, if they follow the French Revolution socialist template, a “Democracy.”
With these considerations, I am most happy to be a Republican...happy to distance myself from that most definitive word (Democrat) that has such connotations. I have heard people deride the Democrats by using the word “Communist.” Actually, they were spot on.
Hillary hates being called by her islamic name, bestowed upon her by Mrs. Arafat:
`SELDOM BIN LAYED’
Great tag line.......especially for ECV
I always write and refer to them as Democrats.....none of this cockamamie ic stuff, because after Dem and you come to rat, no need to go farther you’ve said/written all there is.
There is nothing “democratic” about the Democrat Party.
In fact, the reason the MSM uses “democratic” party is to imply the republicans are not democratic.
“Democrats, Democratic... either way you look at it, they are all just RATS!”
Its a somewhat important point. The Democrats are trying to link their party name with the emotional appeal of the “democratic process” to imply that they are as foundational to the American public as is our liberty.
Allow them to control the language, and they control the debate.
Unlike the French, our revolution made NO attempt to dismantle the church (any church) and had no ‘organized labor’ component.
Subsequent revolutions were very much land reform or labor driven and VERY irreligious.
It must be admitted that AMERICA as a stand alone Christian and representative system was for a very long time a truly unique and wonderful enterprise.
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.