• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What is the future for the Democratic Party?

ChristopherHall said:
Here's the sad truth. The Democrats do put forth plans addressing our nation's current issues. However the Republicans have countless radio talk show hosts and a massive News machine pushing nothing but their agenda for hours on end every day. For example, when I get to work I listen to Neal Boortz plug for Republicans from 9:00AM until 12:00 noon. Then I listen to Rush Limbaugh plug for Republicans until 3:00PM. Then I listen to Sean Hannity plug for Republicans until 6:00PM. That's nine hours of Republican political advertising that hasn't once disclosed the Democratic agenda accept in bias or misrepresentation for entertainment purposes. On FoxNews.com I tried to watch a clip about the Democratic Response, yet it cut away and displayed far more of Bush's speech than Gov. Kaine's response.

You see it isn't that the Democrats do not have an agenda...it's that we are not being allowed to hear it accept in snippits on NPR or PBS.

Foxnews didn't exist before 1996. Rush was not widely heard before 1988. Before that it was all liberal all the time. ABC CBS NBC. Republicans had to listen for years as Dan Rather made stuff up and no one called him on it.

Conservative media is a very new invention, and liberal media is by no means dead. CNN MSNBC ABC BBC and CBS all continue to drone on and on with liberal agendas. The only difference between now and before is that people have a choice of liberal or conservative slants.

Sorry, you don't get the title of the oppressed and voiceless party. The republicans are the ones that had to live through that hell for 40 years.
 
ChristopherHall said:
Here's the sad truth. The Democrats do put forth plans addressing our nation's current issues. However the Republicans have countless radio talk show hosts and a massive News machine pushing nothing but their agenda for hours on end every day. For example, when I get to work I listen to Neal Boortz plug for Republicans from 9:00AM until 12:00 noon. Then I listen to Rush Limbaugh plug for Republicans until 3:00PM. Then I listen to Sean Hannity plug for Republicans until 6:00PM. That's nine hours of Republican political advertising that hasn't once disclosed the Democratic agenda accept in bias or misrepresentation for entertainment purposes. On FoxNews.com I tried to watch a clip about the Democratic Response, yet it cut away and displayed far more of Bush's speech than Gov. Kaine's response.

You see it isn't that the Democrats do not have an agenda...it's that we are not being allowed to hear it accept in snippits on NPR or PBS.

Why aren't you listening to ' Air America " or" National Public Radio ". If people listened to liberal radio there would be more of it ,maybe. The majority of TV stations are liberal .They push the liberal / democrat agenda as much as they can, yet it has little effect.
Its pretty pityful when millions of Americans identify themselfs as Democrats,but. Vote Republican over and over.
 
The Same as the Republican Party,

We only have ONE political Party that HAS TWO FACES, we are being TRICKED! By the powers our founding fathers warned us about.

THis idea can be seen in our last ELECTION, where we were voting for COUSINS!!

Bush and Kerry are Cousins, Blue Bloods, Globalists, Agenda 21 Supporters, and BONES MEN
On film from TV
http://www.infowars.com/print/Secret_societies/kerry_bush_sb.htm

Both Bush and Kerry are the same, Members of a Secret Society that pushes for WORLD GOVERNMENT...and an END TO FREE AMERICA.

ITS A DOUBLE SIDED TRICK, the Bad guys win with who ever we pick.

The Council on Foreign Relations and Project for the New American Century want the Anglo-American Establishment to control the world. The French, the Germans, and the Russians want the UN to control the world. Which group will succeed? Neither. We are witnessing an example of Hegelian dialectic, two forces aligned against one another. One is thesis, the other antithesis. The conflict will produce a synthesis; in this case, the loss of national sovereignty and the end of freedom
http://www.radioliberty.com/nlmar03.html

Bush pushes for the AAE side (America pretends to lead)
He said he
went to Iraq to enforce the UN resolutions and to make the UN
Charter real
Kerry pushes for the UN (the UN pretends to lead)
Kerry Quote

"I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations."


The out come of either case is World government.

SKULL AND BONES IS ALSO A SISTER GROUP TO THIS ONE:

"We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest
or consent."
Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950



Prof. Quigley book Tragedy and Hope

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one perhaps, of the Right and the of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and the academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy… But either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired , unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”
 
FreeThinker said:
Foxnews didn't exist before 1996. Rush was not widely heard before 1988. Before that it was all liberal all the time. ABC CBS NBC. Republicans had to listen for years as Dan Rather made stuff up and no one called him on it.

Conservative media is a very new invention, and liberal media is by no means dead. CNN MSNBC ABC BBC and CBS all continue to drone on and on with liberal agendas. The only difference between now and before is that people have a choice of liberal or conservative slants.

Sorry, you don't get the title of the oppressed and voiceless party. The republicans are the ones that had to live through that hell for 40 years.

I never said that "liberal media" was dead or that there wasn't any "liberal media". What I said is that the Democratic Party's policy agenda is not being presented at all in the press be it liberal or conservative. For example the Democrats have a nine part tax reform agenda, they have a six part Democratic Agenda on Healthcare Reform. But no one is told about it.

So yes, much of the media is liberal...but they definately are not presenting the Democratic agenda.

If they are presenting the Democratic agenda...I challenge you to find the nine part tax reform agenda or the six part healthcare reform agenda on CNN or another mainstream media news source.
 
ChristopherHall said:
I never said that "liberal media" was dead or that there wasn't any "liberal media". What I said is that the Democratic Party's policy agenda is not being presented at all in the press be it liberal or conservative. For example the Democrats have a nine part tax reform agenda, they have a six part Democratic Agenda on Healthcare Reform. But no one is told about it.

So yes, much of the media is liberal...but they definately are not presenting the Democratic agenda.

If they are presenting the Democratic agenda...I challenge you to find the nine part tax reform agenda or the six part healthcare reform agenda on CNN or another mainstream media news source.

maybe it would be if the Dems weren't so busy making outlandish attacks on the President and Republican party

what is more marketable the Dems plan
or the Lunatics of the Dems making outrageous claims about the Reps
 
DeeJayH said:
maybe it would be if the Dems weren't so busy making outlandish attacks on the President and Republican party

what is more marketable the Dems plan
or the Lunatics of the Dems making outrageous claims about the Reps

Ah...yes...the Democrats are making outlandish claims against Republicans and Republicans do the same...however the media (both liberal and conservative) is only reporting the tabloidlike outlandish claims and never reporting "policy" initiatives.
 
Back
Top Bottom