world

McCain offers tougher critcism of Bush economics

63 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

63 Comments
Login to comment

"fears about the meltdown have moved voters firmly in Democrat Barack Obama's direction"

But this makes no sense. There's nothing in Obama's record that indicates that he is more capable of turning this around than McCain.

So, Obama's going to spend $961,000 on his half hour commercial. Man, things are tough all over.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tougher critism or more outlandish tales by Sarah Palin.

McCain has had to calm down the outright lies created by the republican surgates. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gosh this has GOT to make sarge sad! His hero bush being bashed by his hero McCain. The 180s must be making his neck hurt!

Anyway, looking forward to the next debate... it'll be another case of McCain failing. I love in particular how he said the economy is 'okay'. Hahaha. Loser. Ah, well... only a few more weeks of hearing about McCain and his dufus lapdog Palin before they disappear into obscurity when Obama takes office. It's not only the national media that have written this pair off. It's the nation.

Moderator: Please refrain from using expressions like "dufus lapdog Palin." They lower the level of discussion and reflect badly on yourself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith: "dufus lapdog Palin"

Come on, smith, is that your worst insult? Pathetic!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The hour is late; our troubles are getting worse; our enemies watch. We have to act immediately. We have to change direction now.

It sounds to me as though he is talking more about his campaign than he is the economy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There's nothing in Obama's record that indicates that he is more capable of turning this around than McCain.

Nothing but vastly superior intelligence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Glad to see a repudiation of Republican economics from a Republican. That's right John, just step aside and let the Democrats fix things like they did when they helped create a broad, prosperous middle class.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It appears McCain would react to the plummeting bear market the same way Hoover did, namely by reducing government spending though fiddling at the margins, in this case by cutting earmarks out of appropriations bills. That ain't gonna do much, particularly after Uncle Sam has undertaken this USD 700 billion bail-out which has pushed our national debt over the USD 10 trillion mark.

In the area where I live, which until the downturn had a vibrant economy and housing prices to match, the real estate bubble has hit hard. There's a development I drive up on a regular basis which still has the "Opening Summer 2008" sign out front. It doesn't conceal homes, which look about two-thirds finished, that were being built by a developer who has now declared bankruptcy. It's a blight on the suburban landscape.

In occupied developments, many people bought homes they could afford as long as they remained employed and cut consumption in other areas. Once the economy went bad, those who were laid off or had their hours/salaries reduced, couldn't meet their mortgage payments, particularly it they had a sub-prime mortgage.

Having bought with the idea real estate prices would continue to appreciate, they were not happy when developers began auctioning off unsold units at 70 percent of the original asking price. (This translates into a 200 grand difference.) Now you can pick up a forclosed home up at half price, which is great for new buyers but means the existing ones will probably be debt for the rest of their lives.

I'm afraid too many Americans thought they would automatically increase their wealth just by owing property. But neither McCain nor Obama, not to mention GWB, can be blunt about this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mccain offers tougher critcism of bush economics

This kind of reminds me of when I was growing up with my much older and bigger brother.

However, the "you're hitting yourself" game is a lot more enjoyable this time around.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Did not know that Bush had any economic policies to speak of. The sub-prime issue has been on the horizon for some time, however, Bush and the lackeys who surround him were either blissfully ignorant or criminally indept.

Good to see McCain trying to fight his way out of the shadow of a very unpopular incumbent, at this stage of the race, however, with all these other distractions, I cannot see any new messages gaining traction before polling day.

Moreover, with all this talk about taxes, it has to be realized that something has to be done to put the breaks on spending. For some reason, with Iraq, Afghanistan and the bailing out of Wall Street, I get the impression that spending is out of control. Then again, rather than saying that one party would better with regard to spending, I would like to see both candidates make a commitment to fiscal responsible policies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I never thought I´d see the day where 2 democrats are running in a US "election". The only reason to prefer McCain is the cast of dubious characters lurking behind Obama, including communists, slamic radicals, and financial thugs of the worst sort (funny how Soros never gets mentioned). I´d vote McCain, but while holding my nose.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain compared Obama to Herbert Hoover, the Republican who was president when the stock market crashed in 1929 triggering the Depression.

Republicans were no differences.....whatever who was who......

I really want to laughs...with leaders like Bush we have seen in the last years....how can america maintain her leadership this century! Perhaps you guys were sold out by the republicans to the coporations!

Russia China...sure they will slide in with the demising US hegamony!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WilliB,

If we continue to have a democracy and have "elections", you're going to see more of this as long as the President has such significant power. The best way to restore sanity is to make sure that the Congress remains the Article I player and that the President is clearly Article II.

McCain has been a pretty fair politician after getting burned in the Keating scandal. Prior to that I think it is safe to say that he had issues which, in a Democrat, would be called "character issues". Now the cry is that Obama has character issues because of "dubious" figures who "lurk" behind him--such as communists, Islamic radicals, financial thugs, Osama bin Laden, Josef Stalin, and Jack the Ripper. I guess if I really believed all that I'd vote for McCain, too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I actually prefered the old John Mccain - the honorable bipartisan politician.

Sadly, he is long gone and now we are left with an inept, angry old man who is being led off the political cliff by stunningly bad advice from his handlers.

The worst advice was, of course, to select Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I have to say it's funny to see mccain bashing bush.

Made my day :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I actually prefered the old John Mccain - the honorable bipartisan politician.

When McCain was shown in match-ups to be more popular than either Obama and Clinton, way back when, it was because many moderates say him that way. That's the campaign he ran in 2000 (and lost).

He reportedly had two devoted staffers. The problem was, they couldn't get along. The one he cut believed in the power of his message. He was caught by a hot mike telling Peggy Noonan picking Palin "won't work."

McCain went with the Karl Rove protege, this Davis character who essentially told him, "make it about Obama and you can win." In the process McCain galvanized the Republican base, which was always lukewarm toward his candidacy, but alienated moderate voters.

According to Bill Kristol:

What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over. Shut down the rapid responses, end the frantic e-mails, bench the spinning surrogates, stop putting up new TV and Internet ads every minute. In fact, pull all the ads — they’re doing no good anyway. Use that money for televised town halls and half-hour addresses in prime time.

It's too late to deep-six Davis and being back the other guy to run the show.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There's nothing in Obama's record that indicates that he is more capable of turning this around than McCain.

Nothing but vastly superior intelligence.

If Obama is so clever why won't he release his academic reocords?

Why was he so afraid of debating old tired John McCain?

Why was he, by his own admission, unable to use his credit cards as recently as 2000?

Columbia has only said he attended their school and was an unremarkable student in their political science program.

He published nothing at Harvard.

There is a good argument that his two memoirs were ghostwritten.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'd like to see the price tag on each candidates plan to fix the economy.

I want to also know which politicians will give themselves a raise this year. As we all harp on the idea the it is so shameful for CEO's to make out like fat cats, we also need to call out those in government who are just as bad.

The gov should buy back loans which they forced lenders to give the gov should pay for loans to illegals (BOA, BONY) and those who pushed the bills should pay twice fold and be bought to court.

I also propose both houses and the senate take a No Pay year for anyone who has been in office for more than five years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The hour is late; our troubles are getting worse; our enemies watch. We have to act immediately. We have to change direction now.

what do you think they`ve just done? idgit!

"will invest about $125 billion in nine of the biggest U.S. banks, including Citigroup Inc. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc., in the government's latest attempt to shore up confidence in the financial system."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The thing that should worry Obama is the sizable number of undecided voters at this point. They are more likely to go with the familiar candidate, McCain. It doesn't matter at this point what McCain says to try and sway Obama voters. Case in point - Howard Stern ran an scary and hilarious segment where a reporter went to Harlem and questioned Obama supporters on their level of commitment to him. Not surprisingly they claimed to support Obama even when the reporter presented McCain's ideas as Obama's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU

That is the amazing thing to me. Ask any Obama supporter for specific legislation or accomplishments that Obama has achieved and you get nothing but a blank stare followed by a recitation of how he is for "change".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'd like to see the price tag on each candidates plan to fix the economy.

Skip, if you have to ask, you can't afford it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

His criticism's realling keating up. I mean, heating up.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Obama is so clever why won't he release his academic reocords?

Why was he so afraid of debating old tired John McCain?

Why was he, by his own admission, unable to use his credit cards as recently as 2000?

Columbia has only said he attended their school and was an unremarkable student in their political science program.

He published nothing at Harvard.

There is a good argument that his two memoirs were ghostwritten.

If there were anything of substance in such insinuations it's a fair bet that McCain's team would have it all over their campaign ads and it would be in every speech that McCain and Palin have made. But it never gets mentioned, probably because McCain himself knows it would be pointless. Pandering to the ignorance and negativity of a hard core of right-wing rednecks isn't going to help him much. Sticking it to the people who screwed him over in 2000, however...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And his doddery remedy would be what exactly? More of the exact same.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good one simon? Also, this debate about Obama's nationality stinks of another Swiftboat job by the republican rightwing. The old chap of a lawyer who is running the show claims to be a democrat, however, a better description would be a GOP stalking horse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarah Palin - "There’s anger about the insider dealing of lobbyists. Anger about the greed on Wall Street. Anger about the arrogance of the Washington elite,” she said."

Those are all cute soundbites fed to her by a very different person from the one who fed her this absolutely shocking display of butchered English in the Katie Couric interview last month -

PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We-- we do-- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to-- to our state.

Sorry, that gibberish wasn't fed to her by anyone. That gibberish came out of Sarah Palin's own head.

Look, I'm sorry - comments like that are not sensible English. Comments like that are not even rational English.

Comments like that are mumbo jumbo, pure and simple, and they prove that Sarah Palin does not engage her brain before she speaks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The old chap of a lawyer who is running the show claims to be a democrat, however, a better description would be a GOP stalking horse."

He was deputy attorney general of his state. Party affiliation:Democrat He was on the Democratic ticket for governor of PA and the US Senate. So he's a bit of a flake. Any worse than Howie Dean? For 3 decades he’s been a Democrat. And that means he has connections. The kind of connections it takes to get something like this done.Hillary had an army, and they are still unhappy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

this debate about Obama's nationality stinks of another Swiftboat job by the republican rightwing

That would be true if obama would just release his certificate of birth (the one with footprints, fingerprints and signed by the doctor who delivered infant Barry, aka, Barack). Instead, his lawyers filed a motion to delay discovery.

Because he's fighting this goes back to the issue that American voters know little about obama's past.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The old chap" also filed a lawsuit years ago claiming Mr. Bush had a hand in the events of 9/11.

The leftists at that time hailed him as a hero. Heh, now he's considered a conspiracy theorist because he's a democrat who dares to question That One.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HIlarious! That dufus Palin was just caught at a rally speech dissing a bunch of her fans because she (rightly) assumed they were hecklers! hahaha!! Dolt!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"it's funny to see mccain bashing bush"

And if McCain doesn't bash Bush, he's McSame. Can't win with some people.

"bipartisan"

Meaning, surrendering to the other party's policies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The issues, Sarge, the issues.

Forget the personalities. Personalities won't help people pay their mortgages.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi - A lot of those people should never have gotten their mortgages. But thanks to the Democrats, they did!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

willib,

Heh, which "Islamic radicals" does Obama have on his team?

....(dusts off willi's spade)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - "A lot of those people should never have gotten their mortgages. But thanks to the Democrats, they did!"

Sarge, Newsflash! Republicans have been in control for most of the last 8 years.

Why have the Republicans done nothing until now to rectify this problem?

I fully expect you to lay blame on Jimmy Carter next.

PS: Please don't simply copy my comments, change a few words and post it under your name.

Thanks!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Republicans have been in control for most of the last 8 years."

How does that justify the lies that Barney Frank told or the 90 million that a handful of Clinton era Democrats associated with F. Mae and F. Mac awarded themselves?

Don't forget - Nancy Pelosi vowed that the Democrats would clean things up when once they took power in Jan 2007.

Where are the kind of perp walks we had with Enron?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is a good argument that his two memoirs were ghostwritten.

On such fantasies lie the empty shells of many a failed campaign.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake: Regarding the ease of getting mortgages, Sarge doesn't know what he's talking about. Extremely low interest rates, in combination with new, unregulated mortgage-backed securities, promoted by George W. Bush's "ownership society" are what fueled the worst economic crisis in nearly a century.

We have to take it that this is one part of "Bush economics" that McCain disagrees so strongly with.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nancy Pelosi vowed that the Democrats would clean things up when once they took power in Jan 2007.

Her job will be much easier when President Barack Obama returns competent leadership to the White House.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "And if McCain doesn't bash Bush, he's McSame. Can't win with some people."

You're right... you can win with neither Bush nor McCain. Both are losers; one has more than proven it, the other won't get the chance beyond losing the chance to be president.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Her job will be much easier when President Barack Obama returns competent leadership to the White House."

Safe bet.

They definitely can't poll any lower than they are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

unregulated mortgage-backed securities, promoted by George W. Bush's "ownership society" are what fueled the worst economic crisis in nearly a century." Are you willing to wager against that?

Has it occurred to you that not until 2007 were Dems even thinking about the middle class? Wager up, there were a lot more dems behind much of this that you are probably willing to hear. Really, who was the main backer of the GSEs?

Oh, and no matter who wins, the particular Dem keeps that seat.

The worse has yet to come.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi - Newsflash! The Democrats have more to do with this than the Republicans. Check it out. Regarding the ease of getting mortgages, yabits doesn't know what he's talking about. The Democrat policy of never refusing anyone a mortgage regardless of their ability to pay is what led to this debacle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Safe bet. They definitely can't poll any lower than they are.

Funny. Remove more Republicans from Congress and the White House and watch those numbers rise. Republicans are really only good for ballast.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Has it occurred to you that not until 2007 were Dems even thinking about the middle class? Wager up, there were a lot more dems behind much of this that you are probably willing to hear. Really, who was the main backer of the GSEs?

Ye-up, And it goes way back.

Between them both, Franklin Roosevelt and Bill Clinton would arguably have to shoulder the biggest part of the blame for the destruction of American capitalism. The legislation they passed as well as that passed during the terms of presidency of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush jnr led directly to the smoking embers of what was once the economic engine of the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - "Check it out."

Check what out?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Has it occurred to you that not until 2007 were Dems even thinking about the middle class?

At what point in history had Democrats stopped "thinking about" the middle class?

Wager up, there were a lot more dems behind much of this that you are probably willing to hear.

Republicans ran policy for most of past 15 years. You simply can't get around that. Were some Democrats involved? You bet. But it was Republicans who were calling the plays and sending more in from the sidelines.

For a list of the things that screwed this all up see the following link:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/161936/page/4

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But of course, it is very expedient to point fingers at a figure head of the opposition political party to yours. The role of American presidents, and even that of their handlers the ruling elite, is only a part of the story. A good part of what the legislation passed by those presidents, at the time, was perfectly logical given the pressures on the American economy at the time. The truth is nothing they could do could change the fact that there is fundamental contradiction between capitalism and the nation state framework within which capitalist economies must develop.

Even a nation as rich as the US was unable to resolve the problems of global capitalism.

Blaming a president without considering the wider environment they stood in at that time is like blaming the captain of the Titanic for the outcome of the final voyage. Sure he was probably arrogantly and blindly proud and driven to make good speed, but he was under clear orders to make haste, and the ship had rivets made of substandard soft steel, the ship design impressed but in fact could not do what it was cracked up to, there was never an intention to save all lives aboard in the event of a disaster, in fact the only ones likely to be saved were the wealthy who mostly had access to lifeboats. Then there were the icebergs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Newsflash! The Democrats have more to do with this than the Republicans.

Newsflash! Sarge does not know what he is talking about.

All this happened during seven years of Bush's watch, working through most of it with a Republican-controlled Congress. As John McCain would readily agree, there was no "Democratic policy" to force any bank to give loans to unqualified borrowers. Simple greed took over the minds of many bankers, as many believed that the risk of foreclosure would be offset by real estate values that would only continue to rise.

And the ONLY thing that could have mitigated that greed is wise intervention by those in charge in our nation's capital. That would be George W. Bush.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Blaming a president without considering the wider environment they stood in at that time is like blaming the captain of the Titanic for the outcome of the final voyage.

Well, it's clear you've never served aboard a ship.

The truth is nothing they could do could change the fact that there is fundamental contradiction between capitalism and the nation state framework within which capitalist economies must develop.

Pure malarky.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Most sub-prime mortgages were written between 2004 and early 2007, after interest rates were allowed to remain low for too long (on that there is bipartisan consensus).

This enabled banks to raise interest rates later and buyers, who assumed the value of their property would continue to appreciate, felt they could absorb such increases down the road. Then the economy went bad, resulting in lay-offs and cut-backs, and many had trouble meeting existing payments, never mind one which rose precipitously.

Several communities over from where I live, farther from the water where land values are cheaper resulting in a lot of real estate development, they have 600 residential properties on the market, of which only 50 find buyers each month. This is the Republican part of the county and I will be interested to see the voting returns after they are made public.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Home ownership is very much a part of the American dream. It is of course subsidized by Uncle Sam who allows those with mortgages to deduct the interest payments from their taxes. George HW Bush, when he confronted the deficit run up during the Reagan years, wanted to rescind this policy in order to balance the books. His idea was met with a resounding "No," it was a middle class entitlement and nobody was going to give it up.

It's not surprising people strive toward home ownership. Local governments also want home owners, rather than renters who have much less stake in community welfare, to be the dominant majority. Now we're entering into a period where affected communities will have to cope with a lot of unoccupied properties.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits - Newsflash! Sarge does indeed know what he be talkin' about:

www.borderfirereport.net/alan-caruba/democrats-caused-the-financial-meltdown.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gawd, the world is in chaos 'cos of America. i reckon both of the candidates are as bad as each other, oh yes a im pilitically very astute you know.

What choice have the Yanks got? A couple of merchant bankers, blimey great democracy eh!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"the world is in chaos 'cos of America"

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong - GSEs - Explain the acronym please. Trying to follow. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: I interpreted GSE to mean "government-sponsored enterprise," of which Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were two.

GSEs started in 1916 and have enjoyed bipartisan support ever since.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reference to Alan Caruba's article claiming "the Democrats did it," he refers to a 1999 decision by Fannie Mae to "ease credit to aid mortgage lending."

1999 was nearly ten years ago. Bush has been in power for nearly 8 of those 10 years -- with Republicans controlling Congress for most of that period. How was it that there was no leadership to press Fannie Mae to exercise better control? Had Bush and the Republicans acted to do so in 2002 or 2003 would the problem become as bad as it has?

No wonder John McCain is attacking Bush-o-nomics. The American people are not as stupid as some to believe that the Democrats are primarily to blame.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Thanks yabits.

When did the markets start packaging all these mortgages and selling them on the market in multi-million dollar packages? Investment vehicles that became nightmares.

I know that if a person had to refinance his home mortgage, it couldn't be done because the loan owner was a corporate enigma. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: The instruments known as "swaps" did not come into being in the mortgage industry until 2001-2002. The model for credit swaps had always existed in the commodities markets, but they were deemed illegal for stocks and other financial instruments by a law passed in the early 80s, known as the Shad-Johnson Accord.

A law, authored by Republicans in both houses of Congress and signed by then-President Clinton in December of 2000, known as the Commodity Futures Modernization Act removed the restrictions of Shad-Johnson. Phil Gramm is considered to be the "brains" behind that bill.

"The housing bubble was the result of the Ponzi-scheme antics of those other financial entities: commercial banks, stockbrokers and hedge funds, which were allowed in a GOP-deregulated market to get into the 'swap' business. Through the rampant reselling of loans, the obligation to collect on a loan was divorced from the act of selling it in the first place, so who cared if the recipient of the loan was not at all qualified or the appraisal of the property value was inflated, as long as the paper was traded away, or insured, before the moment of foreclosure?"

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080922/scheer

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I became aware of "swaps" about a month or two ago. I was astonished at how Wall Street was allowed to purchase all these investment vehicles with no calateral at all.

And when they worked the "swaps" together with the Structured investments vehicles, it was the ton of debt by Wall Street that the market couldn't absorb or trust. < :-)

The below I posted on another article today.

From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuredinvestmentvehicles

In October 2007 the U.S. government announced that it would initiate (but not fund) a Super SIV bailout fund (see also Master Liquidity Enhancement Conduit). This plan was abandoned in December 2007. Instead, banks such as Citibank announced they would rescue the SIVs they had sponsored and would bring them onto the banks' balance sheets. On Feb. 11, 2008, Standard Chartered Bank reversed its pledge to support the Whistlejacket SIV. Deloitte & Touche announced that it had been appointed receiver for the failing fund. Orange County, California has $80 million invested in Whistlejacket.

It appears that this type of investment was created while Ronald Reagan was president. You remember Reaganomics and the trickle down effect?

What trickled down was this whole catastrophic investment systems that Main Street will have to bail out Wall Street from. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Harold Steptoe

i reckon both of the candidates are as bad as each other... What choice have the Yanks got?

True. Worse though is that the Democrats and Republicans are fundamentally representative of the same interests, the same financial elite that rule the US. Financial elites rule in all the major economic powers, and it is now that the financial system is in collapse that the reality has been rendered visible for all to see.

blimey great democracy eh!

If this is sarcasm then you are dead on the button, because the two party system is a fraud, in that it fronts just one group al be it two factions of that one group, and they represent the same interests.

There is an alternative, just one that is actually completely outside the influence of the ogliarchy in control of Washington. Jerry White is the presidential candidate for the Socialist Equality Party (SEP) in America. You won't see him appear often on mainstream media in the next two weeks at least, but Jerry is on Youtube in several video speeches.

SEP presidential candidate speaks on financial crisis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUtu0o8MSNk

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All this happened during seven years of Bush's watch,"

How long have you been buying houses, re-selling them or how many plots have you been involved in with new development?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Many make the mistake of assuming that economic interests are the sole factor in identifying political affiliation and were that wholly true, then yes, the Democratic Party and Republican Party do indeed look quite similar. But that’s only on the surface and that’s only with regard to economics. Social issues are by far the greatest single determining factor between members of the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the Green Party, or virtually any other party out there, major or minor.

The Republican Party represents a constituency that tends to be more Christian, Caucasian, and wealthy. More to the point, the religious leanings of many Republicans helps shape Party representatives’ efforts to influence social policies ranging from abortion rights to stem cell research to gay marriage rights to teaching “Creationism” in public school classrooms to securing a legal right to private gun ownership for all Americans. “Traditional Family Values” was a long-time platform of the Republican Party, reflecting the will of a constituency that holds conservative views regarding the composition and deportment of an American family.

The Democrat Party, on the other hand, tends to represent more secular or “less” Christian constituents, minorities, and Americans possessing a comparatively smaller portion of the overall national wealth. The secular flavor of the Democratic Party guides policy initiatives that include ensuring the continued legality of abortion, the securing of the right to marry for homosexuals, greater support for stem cell research, a repudiation of “Creationism,” and a call for great restrictions on the private ownership of firearms.

In the cases of both parties, economics hold an important place in the minds of the constituency, however, a glance at the underlying motivations of either parties shows that Republicans often subscribe to the tenet that a person’s success (or failure) should depend almost exclusively on his or her own merits and efforts, and that this philosophy of individual perseverance contributes to the economic wealth of the nation. This might be best described as the “By Your Own Bootstraps” school of thought.

Conversely, Democrats lean more towards the idea that despite one’s merits or efforts, sometimes it is in the best interest of society as a whole to lend a helping hand to those not possessing the economic, social, or cultural advantages that help make the attainment of social and economic success easier. “Level The Playing Field” might be a good way to describe this philosophy.

In short, Republicans and Democrats are not the same. Not by a long shot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites