I'm in a Mood! Need to RANT!

[MarcSpaz]

The Democrat and Republican parties were founded in 1857. From 1861 to 1933, the Republican Party (also known as Conservative Party) controlled at least 2 branches of government. In that 76 years, the US became the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world. Mostly, because during that exact same 76 years, the US Industrial Revolution was happening, giving birth to some of the greatest inventions and wealth, ever.

Then, starting in 1933, the Democrat party (also known as the Progressive Party) took over and ran at least two branches of government from 1933 to 1981. In that 48 years, we got the EPA, the DOE, Dept. of Education, HHS, and most of the regulatory agencies that exist today. In that time frame, we just barely held on to the status of the wealthiest country, but only because we gave birth to invention, like massive improvement in electronic technology, computers and the internet, in spite of the overwhelming new regulations being passed on industry.

We were cursed with massive civil right violations against Americans with Japanese lineage, “Black Codes”, Jim Crow laws and the Federal Government started stripping more and more power away from the States. Laws being created like the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act directly correlates to the US murder rate jumping from 4.6 to an outrageous 10.2!

It wasn’t until the New Republican Party took majority control for 8 years starting in 1981 to 1989, that the firearms laws at the state level started to improve. Reagan led the way with the Firearms Owners Protection Act, repealing parts of the Gun Control Act, and reinforced self-reliance and family values. In that 8 years, we bolstered our position in the world both financially and the power of our military. The largest average annual pay increases were recorded in those 8 years. We took down the Soviet Union, the wall came down, and many tyrannical leaders were overthrown.

Starting in 1989, the Democratic Party has had power of at least two branches of government… again. In that 26 years, more regulatory agencies were made, our prison system has grown 790%, the Taliban was created, Al Qaida was formed, ISIS has established a caliphate, the USSR is quickly on the path to reconstitution, and WW3 has been underway for more than a year. All direct results of either action or inaction of the government and its controlling party.

After Reagan was out of office, there was an outright “assault weapons” ban, which was a completely made up class, created by the government based on looks. This lead to the murder rate starting to tick back up in 1994. It wasn’t until the AWB expired in 2004 and states finally started allowing citizens to carry weapons again, that the homicide rate started to drop again. The people via their State legislature spent the last 20 years trying to undo the mess the Democrats created, finally getting the murder rate back down to 4.6 after an astonishing 81 years.

To make things worse, the military has been torn apart and weakened by the administration. We are no longer a global leader as far as our military is concerned. The dollar has been so devalued that the rest of the world is considering switching to the Euro for the standard international currency.

To top things off, globally we are 7th in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, 3th in median household income, 4th in labor force participation and 4th in exports.

What we lead the world in is number of incarcerated citizens per capita and defense spending… even though we aren’t doing anything with it. In fact, we have more people in prison than every other country in the world combined and spend more on defense then the next 25 largest spending countries combined.

Sadly, America is no longer the greatest country in the world, but we can be. It’s time to take our Government back and make this Nation what our founding fathers wanted it to be!

[FiremanBob]

Once you understand where Woodrow Wilson, John Dewey, and most of FDR's top advisers got their ideas, you will understand that the Democrat Party is actually an arm of the European Fascist/Communist movement disguised as Americans.

[SHMIV]

I used to think that we were infiltrated with communist/fascist/socialist spies at the end of the 2nd World War.

Then, I started to read about Gen. Patton, and the way he was treated by our own government people, including Gen. Eisenhower.

Now, I believe that the infiltration began around the time of the 1st World War, if not sooner.

I wish that I had the time and resources to look further into it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[grumpyMSG]

I think you need to take some serious history lessons, because you have taken a serious party line, political hack point of view. Just a few points: Thomas Jefferson was one of the founders of the Democratic party. I would say in today's times he would squarely fall into the Libertarian camp, not what his party became. Another significant contributor to it's history was Andrew Jackson, who routinely ignored everybody he wanted to (including the Supreme Court), When Congress wouldn't let him have certain folks for his cabinet, they became his "kitchen" cabinet, advising him anyway. He was the last President to have the Federal Gov't in monetary balance, with some money in the treasury and all the bills paid. He was also responsible for the "Trail of Tears" for native Americans and was probably the original 'Indian Giver".

As far a "progressive" government goes, its origins fall to a Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, one of his creations was the National Park Service and the beginnings of the National Parks. Woodrow Wilson had a big hand in guiding the movement. As much as I don't like parts of the "New Deal", The financial collapse of the late '20s was not made by a President of either party. It was created by many people borrowing money to speculate in the market.

[kelu]

This is going long back: http://consciouslifenews.com/verified-w ... e/1136001/

[MarcSpaz]

Greg, for the last 5 years I have been studying the founding of our country, the Constitution, and political trends since the start of the the British settlers uprising. The more I learn, the more PO'ed I get. Especially when someone like yourself tries to twist fact to fit your opinion. Anyone can cherry pick a few people or actions to "disprove" an opinion (as if that's possible). The reality is, there is more than 1 person that makes decisions. I am talking about the majority "Party" actions, not any one specific leader, leading the country in a specific direction over the course centuries. The trending actions of the "Party" are historical fact and saying anything other is just fools play.

And yes, the Democrat party of the late 1800's and early 1900's were, by far, a much different party then they are today. There is no denying that. Some of today's Tea Party members aren't as conservative as an 1800's Democrat. You making the statement just helps support my point and opinion that the continued degeneration of our nation through "progressive" governing is very real.

Why did you mention the the financial collapse of the late 20's? You trying to change the subject to distract and attack? I didn't mention it because it was all market and no politics. In fact, my complaints started with the end of 1933 and the introduction of the GCA and NFA.

Wait a minute... are you a Democrat???

[Jeff82]

Recessions come and go. All recessions prior to the Great Depression were handled financially and ended fairly quickly with little effect. The Heat Depression on the other hand was handled by a Democrat politically. It was longer and harder than it needed to be and had effected is enormously since.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 Sport using Tapatalk.

[grumpyMSG]

Greg, for the last 5 years I have been studying the founding of our country, the Constitution, and political trends since the start of the the British settlers uprising. The more I learn, the more PO'ed I get. Especially when someone like yourself tries to twist fact to fit your opinion. Anyone can cherry pick a few people or actions to "disprove" an opinion (as if that's possible). The reality is, there is more than 1 person that makes decisions. I am talking about the majority "Party" actions, not any one specific leader, leading the country in a specific direction over the course centuries. The trending actions of the "Party" are historical fact and saying anything other is just fools play.

And yes, the Democrat party of the late 1800's and early 1900's were, by far, a much different party then they are today. There is no denying that. Some of today's Tea Party members aren't as conservative as an 1800's Democrat. You making the statement just helps support my point and opinion that the continued degeneration of our nation through "progressive" governing is very real.

Why did you mention the the financial collapse of the late 20's? You trying to change the subject to distract and attack? I didn't mention it because it was all market and no politics. In fact, my complaints started with the end of 1933 and the introduction of the GCA and NFA.

Wait a minute... are you a Democrat???

I don't twist facts, I merely stated them and used them to support my opinion. Opinions on the other hand, are your or my thoughts on how to interpret the facts. The reason I mentioned the financial collapse of the '20s was because that is what triggered the rise of Roosevelt and the Democrats in the '30s. If you want more facts though, confirm what I am about to say through whatever source you want and get angrier if you'd like. The Republican Party's foundation was the abolitionist movement. There had been several compromises from the start of the nation to relieve the building pressure caused by slavery. It was the election of Lincoln to the Presidency along geographic lines that triggered the Civil war. On this forum there have been many discussions about the Civil war being a states' rights versus slavery issue, you can look for them if you want.

I could have written a post 3 times longer, but few would have read the whole thing. In your original post you mention 2 branches of Government being controlled by the Democrats during certain time periods. The 3 branches of Gov't are Executive, Legislative and Judicial. The Judicial branch was set up to be semi-apolitical, but since the President appoints judges and the Senate confirms, it still has some politics influencing it. I am guessing you were actually talking about a party holding two out of the House of Representatives, the Senate and the Presidency. Even using that standard your story has some flaws, both houses have flopped back and forth between the parties in the last 20 couple years, with both parties having both houses and the Presidency for a few years and then keeping the Presidency and losing both houses. It has happened under Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama. The point I was trying to make, but obviously failed, both parties have a hand in the "progressive" growth of the Federal Gov't. The EPA happened under Nixon's watch, the Department of Energy merged several bureaucracies under the Carter Administration, the Department of Education gained Cabinet status near the end of the Carter administration and connected with that, the No Child Left Behind was implemented during the Bush Jr Administration. My point--BOTH PARTIES HAVE A HAND IN THE MASSIVE EXPANSION OF THE FEDERAL GOV"T!

When it comes to interpreting the data you have offered, we will all sound like sociologists or political pollsters looking at the same numbers and statistics and "seeing" something different. For example, you mention large incarceration rates which were tied to mandatory sentencing guidelines and a dropping murder rate, some would point to that as correlated, lock up violent people and less people will get killed.

When it comes to the formation of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and ISIS, The origins of Al Qaeda and the Taliban began during the time of the Russian Afghanistan war, I think we may have had our fingers in that pie as country, if I am not mistaken. I think we were funneling weapons there weren't we? Osama Bin Laden, developed his hatred for us and the Saudis in 1990, he wanted to lead an Islamic army to throw the Iraqi army out of Kuwait. He was incited to hatred when the Saudi king had "infidels" protecting Islam's holiest cities. He got his battlefield start and respect in Afghanistan and the seeds of hatred planted in 1990. The Taliban rose to power after the Russians left Afghanistan.

[MarcSpaz]

Greg... not that I do or don't disagree... but sometime a rant is just a rant.

When it comes to the formation of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and ISIS, The origins of Al Qaeda and the Taliban began during the time of the Russian Afghanistan war, I think we may have had our fingers in that pie as country, if I am not mistaken. I think we were funneling weapons there weren't we?

I never understood how our leaders repeatedly make bad choices when it come to foreign affairs. Some people believe that the Lord God himself put a curse on that land and its people, condemning them to an eternity of war. Weather you believe this or not, those nuts have been killing themselves and everyone around them for at least 1400 years. I doubt anyone alive in the US or the western society is going to fix it. Invariably, we are the victim of our own device, because regardless of what "side" we pick, in the end, they all want us dead.

[dusterdude]

Marc,i believe those people are cursed to fighting forever and we should leave well enough alone

[Mindflayer]

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. 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.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

[Jeff82]

Big George, 1796.