Okay, Dems, What Went Wrong? And How Can We Fix It?

Liberalism was set up by the Great Depression, a catastrophe which leveled the rich and poor to virtually the same playing field. It was a time when people were forced by circumstance to realize that no person is an island. Roosevelt's programs were for the most part a reflection of that. As succeeding generations become distanced from the Depression the more they revert to pre-Great Depression values, helped along by the liberal Democrats' abuse of their own power. People have reverted to their own natural selfish ways. What will it take to give liberalism a new start? Probably a catastrophe of like proportions. Which is not to say the liberals are wrong, necessarily, but they have the antiquated nature thing to overcome. Progress is always dragged down by societies not yet evolved in their thinking. It may be a few hundred years or more before humankind as a whole catches up to true progressive thinking.

edgarblythe wrote:

Liberalism was set up by the Great Depression, a catastrophe which leveled the rich and poor to virtually the same playing field. It was a time when people were forced by circumstance to realize that no person is an island. Roosevelt's programs were for the most part a reflection of that. As succeeding generations become distanced from the Depression the more they revert to pre-Great Depression values, helped along by the liberal Democrats' abuse of their own power. People have reverted to their own natural selfish ways. What will it take to give liberalism a new start? Probably a catastrophe of like proportions. Which is not to say the liberals are wrong, necessarily, but they have the antiquated nature thing to overcome. Progress is always dragged down by societies not yet evolved in their thinking. It may be a few hundred years or more before humankind as a whole catches up to true progressive thinking.

As I've read it, there had been two or three depressions prior to that of the 30s which were just as bad, and the economy recovered within a year or a year and a half on its own as politicians watched. In other words, there is every reason to believe that Roosevelt's policies extended the depression for the better part of a decade unnecessarily.

"Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened nation?"

But of course. Both are theories...one is the Theory of Evolution, another a matter of faith in divine intervention of the Creator.

Neither has been conclusively proven right or wrong.

BTW, I personally favor the Theory of Evolution, but that is just my opinion.

"The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a
number with 40,000 noughts after it... It is big enough to bury Darwin and
the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this
planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random,
they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."

Sir Fred Hoyle
Nature, Nov 12, 1981, p. 148

blatham wrote:

Statistic of the Day...

In the election of 2004, more people voted to remove President Bush than has been the case with any other president in history.

And, 3.5 million more voted to retain him than remove him and he won the electoral vote by a 6.5% margin.

"The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a
number with 40,000 noughts after it... It is big enough to bury Darwin and
the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this
planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random,
they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."

Sir Fred Hoyle
Nature, Nov 12, 1981, p. 148

The contempt of the liberal elites...

One important indicator of intelligence in action is a demonstrable ability to assimilate and deal with emerging facts.

....I done some thinking in the past few days, after the headshaking and crying were done, and I still believe 1) the basic ideas of this administration -foreign policy- economic-domestic-environmental are flawed in varying degrees from disastrous to merely wack and 2) the liberal ideas in all those areas are not only superior, but more in line with the America ideals of equality, progress and human rights.

Our task is to express those ideas simply.

For us, complex is easy, simple is hard.

blatham wrote:

Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened nation?

Easily. The theory of evolution is a bunch of bullshit. A nation such as Haiti which believes in voodoo could be called enlightened compared to evolutionists.

Then count yourself with Nancy Pelosi who said yesterday that more introspection and criticism of Democrat positions is not needed. Instead they must focus on doing a better job educating the public so it will better understand the wisdom of their views.


I don't call that intelligently dealing with new facts. I call it complacent, inward looking elitist prejudice and ignorance.

At the bottom of all this is whether a person can understand complex ideas. If someone can only understand the simple (one miracle is all it takes) then they are stuck in the simple, but the possibilities in life are infinite and that's a much bigger concept then a puny number like X with 40, 000 naughts.

Now, b, please try to remember that there is only one imaginary being controlling our every thought and those voodoo people believe there are hundreds. See? Simple is better. Complex is, well, complex.