Monday, October 16, 2006

Quote of the Day: Democrats and Republicans

The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it. --P. J. O'Rourke


Too bad the Republicans are so damn good at it.

10 comments:

dbackdad said...

I like O'Rourke. One of the few right-leaning writers that I can stomach.

asher said...

O'Rourke has changed his politics almost as often as his socks.


How about this one?

Without God, life is ultimately meaningless. Your personal life may have meaning but life as a whole has no meaning.

Try this one on.

Random said...

Asher,

More precisely, O'Rourke was a Maoist/ Marxist/Socialist/Pothead in the sixties. Then he grew up and left the lefty nonsense behind.

CyberKitten said...

asher said: Your personal life may have meaning but life as a whole has no meaning.

Yup. I agree [grin].

Scott said...

There's a difference between Demicans and Republicats?

Jewish Atheist said...

scott:

If Gore had won in 2000, there would have been no war in Iraq -- and if there were a war in Iraq, it would have been run much better. There would have been no tax cuts for the top 1% of Americans at the expense of future generations. There might not have even been a 9/11. There would be much less torture. President Gore wouldn't be trying to undermine habeas corpus. There would be two fewer hard-right Judges and two more moderate or left-wing judges.

The differences may not be as big as you or I would like, and you might prefer the Republican policies to the Democratic ones, but the differences are significant.

Scott said...

If Gore had won in 2000, there would have been no war in Iraq

The Democrats voted along side the Republicans FOR the war in Iraq. Granted there were Democrats against it but not enough to stop it. Of course we may not have gone to war with Iraq if Gore was president, but we also might not have gone if a different Republican was president. It was Bush's decision to go and a different individual would have a different take on it obviously.

There would have been no tax cuts for the top 1% of Americans at the expense of future generations.

Which would have been terrible. Tax cuts are always good. There's no such thing as bad tax cuts. They don't exist. Every tax cut no matter who it's for helps the economy of this and future generations.

There might not have even been a 9/11.

Um, well I don't know what to say about that. First you'd have to some how show it could have been prevented, I guess.

There would be much less torture. President Gore wouldn't be trying to undermine habeas corpus.

Well if Bush's predecessor is any indicator of what Democrats think about habeas corpus then there's not reason to believe that is true.

Wire taps: http://www.worldfreeinternet.net/news/nws4.htm

No-Warrant Searches:
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200512200946.asp

Holding inmates at Guantanamo without trial:
http://www.slate.com/id/2132979/?nav=ais

There would be two fewer hard-right Judges and two more moderate or left-wing judges.

Meh. Either way they'd be judges ready to over step the boundaries of the Constitution.


The problem is both parties are inherently pro-statist and anti-individual. They both think that Governments are inherently powerful and capable of making decisions on behalf of individuals. They both think Government is the solution to societies problems, they just have different means of solving them. Of course whatever means they come up with just worsen the current problem and create additional problems.

Jewish Atheist said...

Tax cuts are always good. There's no such thing as bad tax cuts. They don't exist. Every tax cut no matter who it's for helps the economy of this and future generations.

Sounds like we have no hope of agreeing on fiscal matters. :-) But how can tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts be anything but irresponsible? That's like saying all income is good, no matter what. Even if it's a cash advance from your credit card at 400% a month.

The problem is both parties are inherently pro-statist and anti-individual.

I agree with that -- I know I'm way more socially libertarian than are the Democrats in power. Seems obvious that people in power want to use it. It's the Republicans who keep running on the promise to stop, though -- I wonder how long they'll be able to fool people.

Scott said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Scott said...

But how can tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts be anything but irresponsible?

Well of course, but taxes have no correlation to spending increases or decreases. In fact the only tax that we ususally talk about on the Federal level is the income tax, and none of our income tax dollars, whether we are Bill Gates or someone incredibly poor like myself, go to the social services or military spending that we can adjust up or down. They all go to paying interest on the national debt.

It's the Republicans who keep running on the promise to stop

Ha, very true. One has to giggle a bit when they here Republicans referred to as "conservatives" now-a-days.